Reverse Interview: A Recipe for Negotiation - Kwame's Negotiation Insights on The Leadership Podcast

Hello my fellow negotiators.

Did you know I once had a.

Listener share that after listening to our podcast, she was able to negotiate a $53,000 raise.

And you know what I told her?

Where is my commission? Just kidding.

But the real story is this was.

After years of being too afraid to negotiate. But after listening to a couple of episodes on Salary Negotiation, she felt equipped with with the confidence and tools to ask for the payment she deserved. And that, my friends, is the power of negotiation. And through a subscription to our new membership community Negotiate Anything Premium, we're taking that power to the next level. With customized playlists based on our most popular topics, you'll be able to find the episodes you're looking for much faster and much easier. A tool that comes in handy as you're getting ready to prepare for an important negotiation. Even I find myself asking which episode should I listen to before heading into a high stakes negotiation? And you might be saying, but Kwame, you're the ones having the conversations. But I forget. So I listen to the episodes multiple times. Okay, now here's the thing about Negotiate Anything Premium. It'll allow you to dive deeper into the specific situations you're facing, whether it's a salary negotiation, an important business meeting, or an emotional conversation with a loved one. Bonus for you. In addition to ad free and extended episodes, Premium members will have exclusive access to solo episodes and insights from yours truly. And as you know, it will be very dry and very boring. Because I have no sense of humor and this is something that you all have been asking for. I'll also be offering personalized answers to some of your most burning questions through our Ask Me Anything feature. If you've been enjoying our traditional feedback, imagine the value a premium subscription can offer. I've felt the benefit of negotiation firsthand and it is life changing. Many of you don't know this, but my journey has taken me from people pleaser to a confident negotiator. Because I was able to do two simple things through negotiation. I was able to first change my mindset and then I was able to improve my skill set. And that is what will happen for you when you join Premium. I've already seen the impact of these skills and the power of this model not only in my own life, but also in the lives and careers of our clients all around the world. My family, my friends, and our team here at A&I, and I am confident that it can do the same for you. Now, are you ready to negotiate more of the best things in life? Check the link in the show notes to learn more. I'm excited to continue the conversation.

I'll catch you later.

A conversation with Leaders who Serve the Public Good My name is Trevor Brown and I'm privileged to serve as Dean of the John Glenn College of Public affairs at the Ohio State University, where we aspire to fulfill a simple phrase that Senator John Glenn used to describe what we do, inspire citizenship and develop leadership. I also have the honor of serving as the host of this conversation series, so welcome to a thoughtful and reflective conversation about leadership. I'm joined today by Kwame Christian, two time bestselling author, keynote speaker, business lawyer and CEO of the American Negotiation Institute. He's recognized as one of the world's top negotiation experts and hosts a number one negotiation podcast in the world, Negotiate Anything. He gained his prominence through a TEDx talk, Finding Confidence in Conflict, which has been viewed over 500,000 times. He's the author of two bestselling books, finding Confidence in Conflict and how to have Difficult Conversations About Race. Under Kwame's leadership, the American Negotiation Institute has worked with several Fortune 500 companies and globally recognized organizations like Google, Apple, NASA, Uber, Target, intel and and Liberty Mutual Insurance and more on applying the fundamentals of negotiation to organizational success. Kwame, thank you for joining me today to talk about negotiation and particularly how we can persuade people to engage in certain behavior change in the public sector.

I appreciate it. Thanks for having me. And I must add an important element of my bio, arguably the most important. I am a proud graduate of the John Glenn College of Public affairs, of course, course, and I attribute a lot of my success to to that background. So I appreciate having the invite to come back on the show.

Well, I'm thrilled you called that out. And just for truth and advertising, Kwame is also a graduate of the Moritz College of Law here, which has as of this year, the number one ranked program in alternative dispute resolution, which also helps explain his tremendous success in the negotiation world. And I love the fact, in fact, we're going to talk about this throughout the conversation today about how you meld those legal skills with the context of the public sector. I think that's going to be a theme that runs throughout. But I want to start with some scene setting because I think a lot of our listeners are, especially here in higher ed, we spend a lot of time thinking about how to get people to when we're in a conversation that might be categorized as a negotiation, to negotiate over a set of ideas to I want to get you to agree with me or at least to understand My position as a juxtaposed to more of a managerial context, where not only am I getting somebody, am I negotiating to try to maybe agree about something, but I actually want you to take some action. So I'm trying to persuade you. And the question is, is there a meaningful difference between those two kinds of things? And are the steps that you, as a negotiator, might guide me as a manager to take would vary based on whether it's just a conversation about like, hey, can we agree on this? Or hey, I need you to take the following action.

Yeah, I think it's. It's really important for us to get clear on what it is that we want the actual outcome to be, because sometimes if we're. We think we're clear, but we're not very clear with ourselves. For example, our emotions can take us astray, lead us astray in these endeavors, because, for example, I might have a fundamental emotional drive for you to not just understand, but also agree and then say I'm right and that you are also wrong. So there's a lot that I want out of this, and then I need to essentially have a negotiation with myself to figure out what I really need. So here's an example. When we think about agreement, we all often think about these conversations in terms of agreement. But I can get you to change your behavior without necessarily fundamentally agreeing that I'm correct. I can attest as somebody to the fact that as somebody who's been married for 14 years, I don't always agree, but I do usually comply. Right. You know, so I think we have to understand what it is, especially when we're talking about behavior change or if we're talking about the. In the political arena, arena changing of beliefs, there are going to be strong emotional ties to certain thought processes and certain behaviors, and it might not even be possible for us to accomplish complete thought change, behavior change, and complete agreement. But if I can get you to this point of mutual understanding where I can understand you, you can understand me, and then we could decide on a workable path forward, then that is often a lot more achievable going forward. So I think when we get that clarity in terms of what it is that we actually want, the fundamental mechanics are going to be more or less the same, but it has to start with mutual understanding. And I think that's an important first step.

So take us through those. Those next steps. What are the mechanics? Give us the basic recipe for how to effectively negotiate and potentially over something very conflictual.

Yeah, I like this flow here. When we talk about persuasion, for us, we think about it in terms of diffuse, connect, persuade. So first I'm going to assume that there's some level of emotionality here. So I want to diffuse that emotion, the strong emotion, because it's going to be difficult for the person to process what it is that I'm saying if they're highly emotional. And then I want to create a connection, so I want to empathize, I want to understand, create that, that foundation of mutual understanding. And then once I build that foundation of trust and empathy and build some rapport, then I can persuade. And what's really interesting, Trevor, is that if you can sequence it in this way, if you can diffuse the strong emotions and just connect, a lot of times the persuasion can happen almost organically, but we don't give it that space. So when I'm in an actual conversation, I like to think about the flow that I use as a compassionate curiosity framework. So it's a three step framework we've created that makes it really easy and operational, like operational for people who are actually having these conversations. So when it comes to diffusing, what we're going to do is first acknowledge and validate the emotions in the room. And so we're going to acknowledge by labeling the emotions and then we're going to give the person space to venture, decompress, explain themselves. Then we're going to get curious with compassion. So we're going to ask open ended questions with a compassionate tone to gather information, empathize and build that connection. And then in the last step, what we're going to do is we're going to utilize joint problem solving. So we're going to work with the other person to try to put something together. And I think with this third step, it's so important that it is joint problem solving. There's a collaborative effort here because I don't want to go into this conversation assuming that I'm the sole arbiter of truth and understanding in this conversation. The other person has something valuable to add. So what I can build independently will probably pale in comparison to what we can build together. And so in that last part, we're working together to find some kind of workable solution. But that's a framework that I use for these conversations.

I've got a quick story for you. So I was at this keynote and I talked to a listener and he said, kwame, I love the podcast, but my favorite part, man, I love those commercials.

And I said, I don't think this.

Is a true story. And now let me tell you about Negotiate Anything Premium where you can listen to your favorite Negotiate Anything episodes ad free. With a subscription to Premium, you can get access to more insights from your favorite experts and ad free listening and extended episodes. Bonus, you'll also get access to exclusive episodes and personalized advice from yours truly.

If you've been looking for an easy.

And affordable way to level up your skills and negotiate more of the best things in life, join our Premium community. Now for that gentleman in that fictional story. This ads for you and for the rest of you, I'll see you in Premium.

So that is very helpful and on the face of it, super, super straightforward. I imagine the execution is a lot harder than it sounds. But I want to build off your last point about joint problem solving and actually go back to the beginning where you're trying to diffuse emotions. I'm curious for you, as we'll just refer to you as the negotiator or the one who's initiating the conversation trying to reach some end. Do you do joint activity in that first stage where you said the first step is to acknowledge the emotions that are present, present, and then try to label them so that people say, oh yeah, I'm feeling the following way. And that hopefully diffuses it. Is that something that you do or is that something you do together?

It is. It is a collaborative process because I can't do it without them, but it is something that I'm leading. So throughout this, I have this mentality called conversational leadership. So throughout the conversation, I want to be demonstrating good behaviors in the hope that other people will reciprocate. And so in, in conversation, let's say about there's a manager trying to get somebody to change their behavior. You can use the same conversation, the same framework when it comes to giving feedback. So I might say something like this, Trevor, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like the, the inefficiencies that you're seeing, it's causing a lot of frustration for you. Am I, am I sensing that Right? And then I'll give you the space to explain. Yes, I'm frustrated because of this and that. And one of the most important things for us to recognize here at this point is that we're giving the person space to decompress. We have one goal here and that is to lower the emotional temperature of the room. And so it's highly likely that first of all, you're going to be triggered and emotional at this stage of the conversation too. So there's a lot of discipline and restraint, that's required. But it's likely that the reasons for why they feel the way that they feel may be something that you disagree with fundamentally. So the cause of your frustration in this example might be something that you disagree with. But at this point, I'm just acknowledging and showing that I understand their perspective without agreeing with them or endorsing them if I don't truly agree. So as I'm validating it, I'm thinking of myself almost like a grade school teacher trying to give partial credit on a math problem. So if I'm. If I agree, I'll let you know that I agree. If I disagree, I'll still validate by saying, so let me see if I'm understanding this correctly. You're saying that you feel frustrated because in your perspective. And then I would give that summary. So the person feels understood because a lot of times we, of course, it's nice to get people to agree. They want you to agree with them, you want them to agree with you. But really at the roots of that is understanding. And you, if you can give that person the understanding, the clarity, you can convey the fact that you understand them on a fundamental level, even if you don't agree. That is enough to lower the emotional temperature of the room so we can then progress in the conversation.

So now I want to layer in sort of the context in which these conversations or interactions occur. And I actually just want to put a pin in something where, and I think this will come up in our conversation, but I want to make sure that it's in your brain and mine so you can be subconsciously thinking about it. I can imagine there are contexts in which it appears calm at surface level. Like we're, we're right now just talking to each other, and yet I know underneath it is emotion. And so, like, if I'm just sort of tactically going into the conversation, I could say, oh, well, I've reduced the temperature. We're not yelling at each other. I don't see any of the physiological signs of emotion, and yet I know they're present. And so one of the things I want want you to be thinking about as I ask the next questions is, is it ever wise for me to try and elicit those, to raise the temperature only to then lower it again so that we get it out? Or, or is it better to just start and say, oh, no, no, we're calm now, let's move on in the conversation and we'll just not even invite those emotions into the conversation. And maybe I'll Actually, now that I can see you smiling, let me just ask you that irrespective of context, because it'll come up again. But what, what's your reaction to that?

Yeah, So a couple of things. Let's. Let's talk about the amygdala. So this is the part of the brain where all emotions come from. Positive, negative emotions originate there. The part of the brain we want to activate is the frontal lobe. So we have logical reasoning, emotion management, executive function. That's the higher level thinking that we want to activate. But there's an antagonistic relationship between these two brain structures. So the more emotional you are, the less clearly you're thinking, and vice versa. So when that amygdala is firing, we have to recognize that they cannot process the information that we want to share at a high level. So the reason why I say it's important to recognize this is because when you think about a toddler, the reason why they're so emotional is because their frontal lobe hasn't developed, so they cannot control that amygdala. But as we get older, of course, we can control it a little bit better. And then as we become professionals, we can veil our emotions in professionalism. But that inner toddler is still there.

I bring that person to work every day. It's free. Bring my toddler to work day, every day.

And so when you look at it.

You realize, oh, there could be somebody.

Who seems really calm on the surface, but their toddler is having a tantrum and they're just hiding it. So you have to look at the context clues. Has their body language shifted? Is there a shift in their tonality? Is there a barrier that seems to be invisible that we can't break through? But there's no logical explanation for it. So when I start to see those clues, I'm going to hypothesize that there is an emotional barrier. So I'll be very humble with the assertion, but I'll just say, hey, I might be off on this, but I'm sensing something. Is there. Is there something else that's bothering you or something like that? Because I wouldn't necessarily say I'm intentionally trying to raise the temperature. I would say that I'm trying to take the lid off so we can stop pretending. But you have to create an environment of psychological safety where the person feels comfortable expressing that part of themselves too. So there's a lot of work that.

Goes into it that's extremely helpful. And I'm taking notes furiously in my brain about ways that, wow, I wish I'd said that differently in that conversation, so. So thank you for some guidance. So how much does the context, the organizational context of these interactions matter? So you just gave a great sort of generic example of how as we age, immature, and wind up in a job, we might have developed some norms of behavior that cause us to bury our emotions in a work context, whereas in other contexts it's, it's fully acceptable to sort of let your inner toddler out. And I'm thinking specifically about in, in the public sector, broadly, we, we sometimes have the norm in our world of a kind of dispassionate neutrality and objectivity that, that is, is the veil over which a lot of interactions occur. And that's specifically true for a lot of the, the kind of, the analysts that come out of programs like ours. Put your partisanship aside. Come into this conversation as just a neutral, objective implementer. But that doesn't mean you're always interacting with people that feel the same way. So just since you're trained in both worlds, so to speak, what are your thoughts on how critical those sort of organizational norms in that context is?

They are pivotal. They are so critical. So let's, let's zoom out and then zoom back in. Okay. So in order to be an effective negotiator or conversationalist in these situations, you have to consider three things, three dimensions. So a mindset. Are you confident enough to have the conversation? Do you believe you have what it takes to have these conversations? Then we have skill set. Do you actually have the tools that are required to succeed in these conversations? But then also culture, is the culture, one of which, one that actually encourages constructive conversation? Does it stifle constructive conversation? Does it encourage respectful dissension where people can speak up those type of things? So you can have a really great mindset. You can have an incredible skill set, but a great mindset and a great skill set in a culture that inhibits effective communication will still struggle. And so that cultural element, the context that we find ourselves in during these conversations, are going to be really important. So it's not to say that we cannot break through. If the culture does not really encourage these kinds of conversations, it will just be more difficult. So we have to figure out what those cultural and contextual nuances are and figure out how we can navigate through those in order to still be effective in the conversation.

So let's, this is great. Let's go down this road of where, you know, we train a lot of students to be dispassionate. This goes back to the whole framework. But also it's then reinforced by the culture and norms that facts and analysis should drive decision making. If I just present some person that I'm trying to convince that I'm right, I'm just going to show them the data, so to speak. And in some ways, we even discourage our students from bringing their. Their passions. Sometimes we say, you need to lock those away. So that's the training. That's the norm. But then that just takes step one out of the equation. What guidance would you give to us and to people in those contexts about. No, how to. How to bring forward those emotions or at least acknowledge them, given your own personal inclination to say they're irrelevant?

Yeah. I think what we have to recognize is there is a big difference between being right and being persuasive. And so if you're somebody who has done all the research, you've gathered all the evidence, you have the facts and the data and everything to bolster your argument, we can think about times where we've done all that homework and we have brought that to the conversation, and it has gotten us absolutely nothing in the conversation.

Yes.

It's so frustrating. Right. And so once we're. Once we're able to recognize that there's a difference between being right and being persuasive, then we realize that a lot of times the gap between where we are and where we want to be comes down to that skill of persuasion. And if we go all the way back to ancient Greece and we think about Aristotle, who is really the godfather of persuasion, he thought about it through these. The persuasive triad, the three things that could lead to persuasion. We have ethos, logos, and pathos. So we have ethics, character, we have logic, and then we have passion. And so we have to be able to recognize what it is that will move the other person. Because if we're talking to somebody else who is well trained, they understand the data and things like that, then we can maybe rely a little bit more on. On the logos, the evidence, the data, those type of things. But even if somebody is very focused on the logic, they are usually using the logic and the evidence to substantiate their biased conclusions. So when we think about it psychologically, we have to recognize that. Let's go back to the amygdala versus the frontal lobe. The amygdala moves very quickly. This is the most primitive part of our brain. And so your emotions will have the first shot of interpretation. And a lot of times that means that we will come to our conclusions instantly. Subconsciously. And then that will guide the data and logic that we pay attention to and respect, fueling confirmation bias. And so what we have to do still, even if we have somebody who is very logical, very data driven and everything, we still need to figure out what it is that drives them, how do they feel about that? Because that will change their entire orientation about their perspective on the data and the logic and the evidence. So we still need to have a little bit of the pathos, which is the, the passion, the emotion. We still need to have the, the ethos, which is the character, like, who are you in this conversation? What makes you a trustworthy communicator in this too? And so a lot of times what you'll find is that somebody is really, really good at logical thinking, the, and the, the data and everything like that. But those two other elements of persuasion are often overlooked.

So again, super helpful. What I want to talk about, sort of two types of interactions. One are repeated interactions. Think a manager with an employee or a manager with a supervisor above them, where I'm, I'm repeatedly interacting. How do I get to know what their motivations, what guidance would you, you give me? And then after that I want to ask, what if I just met somebody and I'm in an almost spontaneous negotiation? What are cues for me to know what their pathos is? So start with the first. What's just guidance? And again, a managerial context. What are the best ways to get to know the motivations of those that I might work with?

And Trevor, just disclaimer here. My goal for the rest of this conversation is to be as underwhelming as possible because the answer to that is almost insultingly simple. And it is listening. That's really it. After over a thousand episodes of Negotiate Anything, I realized that in order to be a better negotiator, you just need three things. Again, you're seeing the commonality with three, right? You need to be a better listener, you need to ask better questions, and you need to be able to manage emotions, both yours and the other person. So let's bring that to the conversation with the manager. So I need to be a better listener. And no matter how good you are at listening, there is always room for improvement. And so my goal in these conversations is I almost turn it into a game. Sometimes I have to focus myself through the lens of competition, but I think about it like collaborative competition. So in these conversations, especially when I don't understand somebody or I fundamentally disagree, I play with this, I play this game. I say, I bet I can demonstrate that I understand this person so well that it would actually be shocking. Like, they would actually be surprised at how well I understand them. And potentially it could help them to understand themselves at a deeper level. And so when you think about it that way, like, we're taking the goal of just understanding the words that were spoken from the other party to a whole new level. So now I'm dialed in. And so when you're listening at a deeper level, you're not just listening to what is said, you're also listening to what is not said. You're listening to the emotions behind what's said, the body language, all of those things. And so when somebody can feel that, they feel a lot of respect, because a lot of times when people are feeling disrespected, it's because they feel that the person does not even care enough to understand. And so I'm going to go out of my way to demonstrate that level of listening. And by listening at that level, it encourages people to even share more. So even beyond going into what I need to say and do, if I just listen, I'm going to get more information and I'm going to encourage them to share more information simply by how I'm listening. And so when you actually just really focus on that, the people are ready and willing to give that information, But a lot of times they don't give that information because they don't even think you care enough to listen.

So. And again, sounds so simple and yet so hard. So again, you know, in a repeated work context, this makes eminent sense to me. And, and I, I can, you know, hear myself and, and as you say, always room for improvement. But I want to come to know the people I work with. I want to know what they enjoy doing. I want to know what they get pride out of in a work product. If we're. And then re. And then say, wow, that looked like you really felt good about that. And that gives you the ability to reinforce that later. Right? But in, in a moment in which I'm. I'm just met somebody, how. What are some very tactical ways of, like you just said, of. I'm gonna, I'm gonna demonstrate to you in, in as short a time as possible that I am listening to you and I am understanding you, knowing that there's some, some transaction we're trying to, to engage in. I'm trying to convince you of some argument, and I want you to take some behavior or whatever it may be. How do I listen? Deeply, but efficiently in a, in a first or you know, limited time period.

Yep. So let's use a combination of tools here. So we have compassionate curiosity. And then I'm going to introduce the empathy loop, and then also the question funnel. So we talked about compassionate curiosity. Acknowledge and validate emotions, get curious with compassion, joint problem solving. Then with the empathy loop. What we're going to do is this systematizes the listening process. So when somebody speaks, we're going to listen. And then we're going to summarize it. We're going to say something like, correct me where I'm wrong. But it sounds like you're saying this, that, and the other is that. And then we're going to ask them to actually correct us. So we're not going to advance in the conversation before until they correct. They say, yeah, you got it right. So it's listen, correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you're saying this. Am I close on that? Is that a fair synopsis? However you want to, whatever words you want to give to it, go ahead and use that. But it's that, that process of listening. So I'm not going to just ask questions. I'm going to listen systematically. And then with the question funnel, what I'm doing is I'm starting the conversation off with really broad questions at the beginning, and then I'm getting more specific as the conversation goes on. So, for example, when I was mediating, one of my favorite questions to start off with was, how did we get here? And which seems almost silly because I read the whole case file. They've been litigating for over a year. I know why we're here, but I want to hear it from you. I've never heard it conversationally. And so as I'm listening, I'm listening for a few things, some clues. So I'm going to listen to deviations in tone, pace, and then I'm tone and pace. And then I'm also going to listen to repetition. What do you keep coming back to? And then I'm also going to pay attention to body language. And I don't know what all these things mean, but they are clues for deeper levels of curiosity. So I'm asking you to explain your perspective on this. But there's a key word that you keep on coming back to. You keep on coming back to fiscal responsibility. You mentioned that three times in your response. Interesting. My next question might be, Trevor, you mentioned fiscal responsibility. Can you tell me what that means to you?

Yeah.

And then we just keep on going down. So we're just following this trail of breadcrumb. Breadcrumbs. But just cycling through these really foundational conversational skills as we do it.

So now I want to turn the tables. Let's say I'm a neophyte, of which I am. I'm a total novice, and I'm. I'm in some kind of negotiation with you, the master. Can you give me some jiu jitsu to be able to, like, redirect your. You know, like, what. What do I do if I'm in one of these circumstances where I can tell, oh, wait a minute, this person is sort of levels above me? These skills. How do I become aware of that?

And.

And am I just at your. Am I just a cat toy at that point, or is there. Is there a way to parlay some of this back?

No, you are doomed. No, it's. It's really interesting because first, if you have a good relationship with somebody, then it's not necessarily a bad thing, because that just means a good person has their hand on the steering wheel. So the. The beauty of working at ANI is that everybody on the team, they're great negotiators. So I can tell when they're negotiating. And I'm like, okay, well, no, if you're negotiating with me, I trust you. So it's not bad of a thing.

Yeah.

But usually, let's say it's a situation where it's a little bit more competitive in that regard. I think about it in terms of steering the conversation in a way that is beneficial, because I know that if I'm in a negotiation, I'm really clear not only on what I will say or can say, but I'm really clear on my boundaries, What I won't say, the information I don't feel comfortable disclosing, and the adjustments that I will and will not be willing to make in the conversation. I've already thought about this in advance. And so one of the benefits is recognizing that if you have good negotiation skills and you've prepared, more so than anything, if you've prepared, then the only person that can hurt you is yourself because you allowed it to happen by sharing too much or agreeing to something that you shouldn't have. Yeah. And when it comes to steering the conversation, I would be more concerned about the person steering it in a way that is not beneficial to me. That leads me to potential vulnerabilities that might let me expose myself. And the way that we control the conversation is through questions. Because, Trevor, in this conversation, you are controlling the conversation with the questions that you're asking, I'm talking way more than you. And so in my negotiations, I want to be talking less than the other side. I want that type of interviewer, type of dynamic. But I don't feel controlled in the way that you're asking the questions. It feels very mutual. Right. And so if I recognize that I'm. I'm feeling as if I'm losing control of the conversation, it's probably going to be manifesting itself in the. In the reality that I'm talking too much, sharing too much, and maybe adjusting too much. So what I'll do is I'll still answer the question, but I would make sure that I close my response with another question. Yeah, because now I'm turning the table. I'm taking control. They respond, now I'm asking questions. So I want to make sure that my hand is on the steering wheel, and if I recognize somebody else has grabbed the wheel and taking us in another direction, that's how I can gently bring us back.

No, that's great. That is great, guys. Well, I can talk to you all day, but you're a busy person who's got to go help a lot of people through these difficult conversations. But as we close this, I want to learn a little bit more about you. You strike me as somebody, and I know, having spent time with you before, that this was not just something that came to you innately. And so tell us just briefly about your own journey and how you got to really embrace some of these approaches and how easy or difficult it was, and then what advice you would give to someone where it similarly isn't just innate for them to be a good listener and those kinds of things. So share your story. And what advice do you have? Somebody who maybe started in a similar point to you?

Yeah, for sure. I think what's encouraging about my story is that I started off being profoundly bad at this. It's always funny when somebody in a training says, well, of course it's easy for you. You're a natural. I'm like, natural funny because I was a people pleaser for a long time, and I knew that I needed to change, but I didn't know how. And it wasn't until I got to law school, where I stumbled into a negotiation class simply because it fit into my schedule, that I discovered. Discovered that this was a skill, not a talent I could actually learn from this. So I became obsessed with this, with this process of negotiation. And so at law school at osu, they had these negotiation competitions, and my partner and I, we won the competition at Ohio State. And that gave us the opportunity to represent the school at the American Bar association competition in Ottawa, Ontario. And we won that one as well. And so I was hooked because for me, it was, I gained a lot of confidence from this because every time I stood up for myself, had a tough conversation, it was a vote of confidence for the man that I ultimately want to be. But then I also recognized that if I'm the if I'm struggling with this, other people are struggling with this. And it made me wonder how many people in the world are living limited lives simply because they can't have these conversations. And so for us at A and I, we believe the best things in life are on the other side of difficult conversations. And so for us, we want to help them make to make the world a better place and change lives and communities just one difficult conversation at a time. And so from for folks who are looking at me who say, oh, Kwame's got it, of course he's good at this. I wasn't born like this, I built myself like this. And if anybody else is on that same journey, just know it can be done. It just takes a lot of practice.

Well, Kwame, thank you for letting me win this conversation by asking all the questions and then you providing all of the answers. I am definitely the winner in that. I have gotten so many words, nuggets out of this, but fundamentally a really well thought out framework for how to not only engage in work context, but in life context. So you're doing great work and keep it up and thanks for this conversation.

Hey, my pleasure. Thanks for. Wait, wait.

Now, before you sign off, I have something to tell you that I've never told you before. Just kidding. I've told you before, but you should listen to it again. I want you to know about Negotiate Anything Premium. Imagine all of the things that you love about our traditional feed, plus so much more. I know you like our traditional feed because you're at the end of the episode and with Negotiate Anything Premium, you'll get more bonus content you've been asking for, more of the expert insights that you can't get anywhere else, and more exclusive behind the scenes access into every conversation. Are you ready to get more of what you want out of your life, career and every conversation? With Negotiate Anything Premium, you'll have access to more high level, custom designed content and insights giving you the tools you need to negotiate higher salaries, better deals, and better relationships in your life and career. Once I had a listener share that Negotiate Any Anything helped her to negotiate a $53,000 raise. Could this be you? What would that mean for your life? I've seen firsthand the impact this model has had on my life and the lives of my corporate clients, and I am confident that it can do the same for you. Are you ready to negotiate more of the best things in life? Click the link in the show notes to learn more. I'll catch you later.