[ad_1]
<div _ngcontent-c14 = "" innerhtml = "
by James K. Sebenius
After a lengthy court proceeding, Amazon thought its campus project for the New York headquarters was in the cards. But the company failed to achieve the main objective of the negotiations.Urban development
Amazing Amazing& nbsp;withdrawal from New York& nbsp;disappearing in the news archive, its powerful lessons for negotiators risk being lost. Highly promising agreements in diffuse multi-party contexts with many potential critics, such as Amazon's future headquarters in Queens, often fail as a result of too close negotiations with those with formal power and authority. Negotiation experts have a patriarchal name for a version of this clbadic – and avoidable – mistake:& nbsp;reecide-Announce-reefend& nbsp;or& nbsp;DAD.
In addition to the unwavering support of New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and Governor Andrew Cuomo, Amazon officials have rightly understood that the price offered to New Yorkers would sell itself: more than 25,000 jobs paying more than $ 100,000 each with all the related economic benefits. Decide (in Long Island City, Queens), announce (choice) and defend (against attacks) … and if you are still standing, you win.
Except, Amazon decided, announced, defended, lost and pulled out, blinding virtually everyone involved. As chief negotiator for the agreement in New York& nbsp;criedthis "was supposed to have been a coronation, but rather a kind of coronary".
This surprisingly common result is why an "A" is often added to DAD: "DADA" means Decide-Announce-Defend-Abandon. A seemingly irresistible agreement, approved by the highest authorities, fails in the face of unexpected opposition. The track of these failed offers is& nbsp;long; for examples, see& nbsp;right here,& nbsp;right here& nbsp;(Pdf), and& nbsp;right here& nbsp;(Pdf). For example, consider the& nbsp;handing over of the 2024 Olympic Games in Boston& nbsp;in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington DC. Boston's bid was successful thanks to the support of the state governor, the mayor of Boston, and several of his most influential citizens. Yet, a small group of opponents catalyzed a local movement that, despite exceeding the 1500 spent, finally rolled back the city in 2015.
[DADpeutêtreappropriépourdestransactionspurementprivéessansbloqueurspotentielsbienquelesdemandesimmédiatesàprendreouàlaisserrestentàcourir[DADcanbeappropriateforpurelyprivatedealswithoutpotentialblockersthoughupfronttake-it-or-leave-itdemandsrun[DADpeutêtreappropriépourdestransactionspurementprivéessansbloqueurspotentielsbienquelesdemandesimmédiatesàprendreouàlaisserrestentàcourir[DADcanbeappropriateforpurelyprivatedealswithoutpotentialblockersthoughupfronttake-it-or-leave-itdemandsrun& nbsp;higher risk of rejection& nbsp;(Pdf)& nbsp;no more negotiations going on.]
The frequent failures of DAD negotiations have led some advocates of the project to seek consensus among all stakeholders. In a city like Queens, divided into several factions and political programs, Amazon& nbsp;never& nbsp;have reached a full consensus and have not tried. Requiring full consensus in a multiparty agreement makes you hostage to the most extreme or reluctant part. When you can anticipate unconditional opponents or skeptics with diverse agendas that can regroup opportunistically, do not give them the power to block.
So suppose, with many candidates, Amazon had good reason to choose New York. The comparative advantages likely ranged from a highly educated pool of employees to great incentives and many local entertainment options. Not to mention that, once the new headquarters of Amazon builds, a large part of the New York Congress delegation could count on political support. . . in addition to that of the state of Washington and elected from its new headquarters in Virginia. In addition to avoiding the pitfalls of DAD and total consensus, what could Amazon have done to retain these benefits in New York? What are the lessons for those facing such difficult negotiations?
Build a sufficient consensus
The goal should be to establish a "sufficient consensus" to form a "winning coalition" despite potential blockers. This means gaining enough support from a sufficient number of appropriate parties to get agreement on your proposal and ensure successful implementation. Building a sustainable winning coalition involves systematic steps that my colleague David Lax and I call a& nbsp;"bargaining campaign".
In a complex multiparty context, do not take the victory for granted, never. Today, social media can quickly amplify the views of some opponents, expressing the latent negative concerns of many otherwise pbadive groups. As Amazon has learned, an apparent "movement" may seemingly arise out of nowhere. He can quickly gain traction, surprising and annoying the confident protagonists of a seemingly popular project.
Actively monitor local currents and cross currents of opinion.& nbsp;Would haveAmazon has not hired a single New Yorker to engage continuously with community groups to strengthen support; most of his representatives were shuttling between Washington and Manhattan. The field presence would have provided invaluable local intelligence on rapidly evolving streams of opinion. Beyond the broad survey that indicated& nbsp;70 percent support& nbsp;for the new headquarters, it is& nbsp;not clear& nbsp;Has Amazon commissioned frequent local monitoring surveys – by different demographic groups – to address concerns as well as expectations? Polls and people are your eyes and ears; without them, you risk flying blind in a deadly storm.
Identify and maintain potential allies& nbsp;before& nbsp;you need them. For Amazon, supporters seemed self-evident. after all, more than 200 cities were desperately fighting for the New York prize. Yet well-organized opponents defeated unorganized supporters of the agreement. The old school's reliance on the mayor and governor, powerful agents of power, has been unable to mobilize sufficient support. & Nbsp; Beyond promoting elite support, a project sponsor must systematically work with community groups and local leaders to feel personally challenged and challenged. In-depth preliminary discussions with the construction trades should make the huge amount of new work perfectly clear. Early "job fairs" with examples of applications could help persuade less-educated groups that thousands of new support jobs and training opportunities will come up, as well as the sum of more than $ 100,000 for highly skilled workers. Community groups seeking improved parks, sidewalks and local facilities could be fed at a relatively low cost through credible "good neighbor" commitments. Do not send CEO Jeff Bezos to New York caressing the egoism of friendly local politicians and learn from all the scruples, it was a missed opportunity. After identifying and maintaining supporters, they can be activated for your project if and when needed.
Identify all potential and potential opponents early in the process. Project promoters often find themselves in a reactive and defensive mode, after focusing too late on opponents who have taken the initiative. For Amazon's project, the opposition of organized workers was obvious. Amazon is a strongly anti-union company and New York has many powerful unions that despise Amazon's broader work practices. (It did not help if, at a public meeting, Amazon had ostensibly refused to commit to neutrality over unionization issues.)& nbsp;
Then consider the people of Queens and the surrounding area who feared a giant new employer coming to town. Would all these new employees not cause traffic congestion and overload the rickety subway lines serving Long Island City? (This did not help Amazon to not commit to investing in better local transportation – and even planned a helipad allowing Amazon's managers to stay on top of everything.)& nbsp;
And for a rent-ridden community, would not this influx of Amazonians drive up rents, house prices and property costs, forcing long-term residents and local independent businesses to relocate?
In addition, there was the $ 3 billion "incentive" package that New York was proposing to attract Amazon. It quickly became an albatross: why Amazon, whose value exceeded briefly the trillion dollars, led by the richest man in the world, he needed such incentives? (It did not help Amazon to pay& nbsp;no federal taxes& nbsp;on its earnings of $ 11.2 billion in 2018.) New Yorkers have asked with disapproval why this incentive money should not be used for more urgent local needs. Yet the package of $ 3 billion would come mainly from future tax cuts to be paid by Amazon. So if the company bailed out, there would be no $ 3 billion pot for other purposes. The mayor and the governor have tried in vain to catch up on this issue of the "well-being of the rich," claiming that Amazon's new taxes during this period would rise to about $ 27 billion. dollars, which would imply a return on investment of 3 billion incentives.
It was harder for Amazon to predict the local protest of an increasingly anti-business national mood, especially among New York's blue-but-blue Progressive Democrats, which peaked in the 2018 elections .& nbsp;
Beware of opponents of various concerns who join forces to form a "blocking coalition".Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other Queens organizers already had names, addresses, phone numbers and social media accounts ready to be launched against this new company, Goliath, on behalf of ordinary citizens. Although the polls revealed that a large majority of New Yorkers generally supported the agreement with Amazon, all sorts of grievances, fears and agendas quickly combined to form a strong anti-Amazon movement, which has been highlighted in two hostile city council meetings. When the newly-appointed Senate appointed a& nbsp;opponent of the agreement to an obscure board& nbsp;This required unanimity for the Amazon project to advance, the game was actually over. Amazon picked up his logs and went home, probably to choose a more welcoming place or to distribute the planned employees of the headquarters in several cities.
From the beginning, actively listen to the concerns of potential opponents and respond as much as possible.. This withdrawal from New York was not preordained. Beyond the early culture of its supporters, Amazon should have taken the initiative to listen and respond to the concerns of skeptics. If Amazon would probably not have changed its position as a non-union, for example, it could have engaged with the New York unions to engage in construction projects, subcontractors and service providers without take account of their trade union status. For people involved in transport and traffic jams, Amazon could have taken the initiative to recognize potential problems and commit to working with groups and local authorities to resolve them. For advocates of transportation and housing, this could indicate the $ 27 billion in taxes it should pay over the next decade and commit to working with elected officials and groups. To increase the number of affordable housing and improve public transportation. It could have even allocated part of its $ 3 billion, or $ 1 billion, incentive program to improve public transit and housing near its new headquarters. That would have done a lot to silence the opposition.
Maybe Blasio and Cuomo have advised Amazon to take such steps early in the process. However, after some unsuccessful efforts late in the game to address local concerns (see& nbsp;right hereor& nbsp;right here), the Seattle giant was tired and punting. After the event, however, the mayor of New York said, "We have given Amazon the opportunity to be a good neighbor and do business in the largest city in the world … Instead of working with the community, Amazon has threw this opportunity. "
[Suiteencours:aprèsleretraitetlesconversationsavecBezoslegouverneurdeNewYorkCuomocherchaà[Ongoingsequel:afterthepulloutandconversationswithBezosNewYorkGovernorCuomosoughtto[Suiteencours:aprèsleretraitetlesconversationsavecBezoslegouverneurdeNewYorkCuomocherchaà[Ongoingsequel:afterthepulloutandconversationswithBezosNewYorkGovernorCuomosoughtto& nbsp;Amazon coax back– in accordance with the council of this section to form a solidarity coalition and deal with opponents. Cuomo refused to approve the opponent's nomination to the project, which could have vetoed Queens' proposed seat. Cuomo orchestrated the publication of a complete page& nbsp;letter& nbsp;(Pdf)& nbsp;in Bezos in the New York Times, which included more than 70 signatories, including the AFL-CIO and other unions, local business leaders, community groups, housing tenants rulers Social, the local group NAACP chapter, pastors and elect. The letter& nbsp;indicated& nbsp;that Cuomo "will personally badume responsibility for the project's approval by the state" and that Mayor Bill de Blasio "will work with the governor to manage the community development process". To date, Amazon has not commented or made it clear that this effort will succeed, but such an after-action campaign to create support and deal with opponents would surely have been more effective before the staggering reversal.]
Remember that negotiation does not end with a "yes" but requires sufficient ongoing support for implementation and sustainability.. The type of bargaining campaign I described is designed to create a sufficient and lasting "winning coalition" on behalf of an initiative like Amazon's. But, as this experience shows, an initial "yes" is only the starting point for a successful project that requires sustained support for long-term success.
If Amazon had approached the decision of the New York headquarters in accordance with the seven steps described above,& nbsp;experience suggests& nbsp;(Pdf)& nbsp;that his chances of success would have been much greater. Of course, Amazon might have considered this approach but chose DAD instead. Playing hard in this highly visible case could intimidate other cities looking for jobs and the economic boom of a new Amazon facility: "Do not push us, otherwise we will grow elsewhere". This uncompromising stance worked while Amazon was threatened. special taxes or other cumbersome measures; examples include Texas, South Carolina and Seattle. Yet, by withdrawing from New York, Amazon lost the very real benefits that had led her to choose Queens. And if the seven-step approach described above had not been successful in a timely manner, Amazon still retained the full opt-out option.
Even with a valid project, there will inevitably be opponents and opponents; it is the nature of complex and multi-party contexts. But having a permanent finger on the pulse of the communities and groups involved, nurtured allies, anticipating opponents and seeking to address their concerns, having built enough support and neutralized enough opponents to overwhelm those who remain hostile unconditionally, the fatal formation of blocking coalitions can be dramatically reduced – and your project is much more likely to succeed.
">
by James K. Sebenius
After a lengthy court proceeding, Amazon thought its campus project for the New York headquarters was in the cards. But the company failed to achieve the main objective of the negotiations.Urban development
Amazing Amazing withdrawal from New York disappearing in the news archive, its powerful lessons for negotiators risk being lost. Highly promising agreements in diffuse multi-party contexts with many potential critics, such as Amazon's future headquarters in Queens, often fail as a result of too close negotiations with those with formal power and authority. Negotiation experts have a patriarchal name for a version of this clbadic – and avoidable – mistake: reecide-Announce-reefend or DAD.
In addition to the unwavering support of New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and Governor Andrew Cuomo, Amazon officials have rightly understood that the price offered to New Yorkers would sell itself: more than 25,000 jobs paying more than $ 100,000 each with all the related economic benefits. Decide (in Long Island City, Queens), announce (choice) and defend (against attacks) … and if you are still standing, you win.
Except, Amazon decided, announced, defended, lost and pulled out, blinding virtually everyone involved. As chief negotiator for the agreement in New York cried, that "was supposed to have been a coronation, but rather a coronary".
This surprisingly common result is why an "A" is often added to DAD: "DADA" means Decide-Announce-Defend-Abandon. A seemingly irresistible agreement, approved by the highest authorities, fails in the face of unexpected opposition. The track of these failed offers is long; for examples, see right here, right here (Pdf), and right here (Pdf). For example, consider the handing over of the 2024 Olympic Games in Boston in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington DC. Boston's bid was successful thanks to the support of the state governor, the mayor of Boston, and several of his most influential citizens. Yet, a small group of opponents catalyzed a local movement that, despite exceeding the 1500 spent, finally rolled back the city in 2015.
[DADpeutêtreappropriépourdestransactionspurementprivéessansbloqueurspotentielsbienquelesdemandesimmédiatesàprendreouàlaisserrestentàcourir[DADcanbeappropriateforpurelyprivatedealswithoutpotentialblockersthoughupfronttake-it-or-leave-itdemandsrun[DADpeutêtreappropriépourdestransactionspurementprivéessansbloqueurspotentielsbienquelesdemandesimmédiatesàprendreouàlaisserrestentàcourir[DADcanbeappropriateforpurelyprivatedealswithoutpotentialblockersthoughupfronttake-it-or-leave-itdemandsrun higher risk of rejection (Pdf) no more negotiations going on.]
The frequent failures of DAD negotiations have led some advocates of the project to seek consensus among all stakeholders. In a city like Queens, divided into several factions and political programs, Amazon never have reached a full consensus and have not tried. Requiring full consensus in a multiparty agreement makes you hostage to the most extreme or reluctant part. When you can anticipate unconditional opponents or skeptics with diverse agendas that can regroup opportunistically, do not give them the power to block.
So suppose, with many candidates, Amazon had good reason to choose New York. The comparative advantages likely ranged from a highly educated pool of employees to great incentives and many local entertainment options. Not to mention that, once the new headquarters of Amazon builds, a large part of the New York Congress delegation could count on political support. . . in addition to that of the state of Washington and elected from its new headquarters in Virginia. In addition to avoiding the pitfalls of DAD and total consensus, what could Amazon have done to retain these benefits in New York? What are the lessons for those facing such difficult negotiations?
Build a sufficient consensus
The goal should be to establish a "sufficient consensus" to form a "winning coalition" despite potential blockers. This means gaining enough support from a sufficient number of appropriate parties to get agreement on your proposal and ensure successful implementation. Building a sustainable winning coalition involves systematic steps that my colleague David Lax and I call a "bargaining campaign".
In a complex multiparty context, do not take the victory for granted, never. Today, social media can quickly amplify the views of some opponents, expressing the latent negative concerns of many otherwise pbadive groups. As Amazon has learned, an apparent "movement" may seemingly arise out of nowhere. He can quickly gain traction, surprising and annoying the confident protagonists of a seemingly popular project.
Actively monitor local currents and cross currents of opinion. Amazon would not have hired any New Yorkers to engage with community groups on an ongoing basis to strengthen its support. most of his representatives were shuttling between Washington and Manhattan. The field presence would have provided invaluable local intelligence on rapidly evolving streams of opinion. Beyond the broad survey that indicated 70 percent support for the new headquarters, it is not clear Has Amazon commissioned frequent local monitoring surveys – by different demographic groups – to address concerns as well as expectations? Polls and people are your eyes and ears; without them, you risk flying blind in a deadly storm.
Identify and maintain potential allies before you need them. For Amazon, supporters seemed self-evident. after all, more than 200 cities were desperately fighting for the New York prize. Yet well-organized opponents defeated unorganized supporters of the agreement. The old school's dependence on the mayor and governor, powerful agents of power, has proved unable to mobilize sufficient support. Beyond creating support from the elite, a project sponsor must systematically work with community groups and local leaders so that they feel like personal and tangible issues in the community. proposal. In-depth preliminary discussions with the construction trades should make the huge amount of new work perfectly clear. Early "job fairs" with examples of applications could help persuade less-educated groups that thousands of new support jobs and training opportunities will come up, as well as the sum of more than $ 100,000 for highly skilled workers. Community groups seeking improved parks, sidewalks and local facilities could be fed at a relatively low cost through credible "good neighbor" commitments. Do not send CEO Jeff Bezos to New York caressing the egoism of friendly local politicians and learn from all the scruples, it was a missed opportunity. After identifying and maintaining supporters, they can be activated for your project if and when needed.
Identify all potential and potential opponents early in the process. Project promoters often find themselves in a reactive and defensive mode, after focusing too late on opponents who have taken the initiative. For Amazon's project, the opposition of organized workers was obvious. Amazon is a strongly anti-union company and New York has many powerful unions that despise Amazon's broader work practices. (It did not help if, at a public meeting, Amazon had ostensibly refused to commit to neutrality over unionization issues.)
Then consider the people of Queens and the surrounding area who feared a giant new employer coming to town. Would all these new employees not cause traffic congestion and overload the rickety subway lines serving Long Island City? (This did not help Amazon to not commit to investing in better local transportation – and even planned a helipad allowing Amazon's managers to stay on top of everything.)
And for a rent-ridden community, would not this influx of Amazonians drive up rents, house prices and property costs, forcing long-term residents and local independent businesses to relocate?
In addition, there was the $ 3 billion "incentive" package that New York was proposing to attract Amazon. It quickly became an albatross: why Amazon, whose value exceeded briefly the trillion dollars, led by the richest man in the world, he needed such incentives? (It did not help Amazon to pay no federal taxes on its earnings of $ 11.2 billion in 2018.) New Yorkers have asked with disapproval why this incentive money should not be used for more urgent local needs. Yet the package of $ 3 billion would come mainly from future tax cuts to be paid by Amazon. So if the company bailed out, there would be no $ 3 billion pot for other purposes. The mayor and the governor have tried in vain to catch up on this issue of the "well-being of the rich," claiming that Amazon's new taxes during this period would rise to about $ 27 billion. dollars, which would imply a return on investment of 3 billion incentives.
It was harder for Amazon to predict the local protest of an increasingly anti-business national mood, especially among New York's blue-but-blue Progressive Democrats, which peaked in the 2018 elections .
Beware of opponents of various concerns who join forces to form a "blocking coalition".Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other Queens organizers already had names, addresses, phone numbers and social media accounts ready to be launched against this new company, Goliath, on behalf of ordinary citizens. Although the polls revealed that a large majority of New Yorkers generally supported the agreement with Amazon, all sorts of grievances, fears and agendas quickly combined to form a strong anti-Amazon movement, which has been highlighted in two hostile city council meetings. When the newly-appointed Senate appointed a opponent of the agreement to an obscure board It required unanimity for the Amazon project to materialize, the game was actually over. Amazon picked up his logs and went home, probably to choose a more welcoming place or to distribute the planned employees of the headquarters in several cities.
From the beginning, actively listen to the concerns of potential opponents and respond as much as possible.. This withdrawal from New York was not preordained. Beyond the early culture of its supporters, Amazon should have taken the initiative to listen and respond to the concerns of skeptics. If Amazon would probably not have changed its position as a non-union, for example, it could have engaged with the New York unions to engage in construction projects, subcontractors and service providers without take account of their trade union status. For people involved in transport and traffic jams, Amazon could have taken the initiative to recognize potential problems and commit to working with groups and local authorities to resolve them. For advocates of transportation and housing, this could indicate the $ 27 billion in taxes it should pay over the next decade and commit to working with elected officials and groups. To increase the number of affordable housing and improve public transportation. It could have even allocated part of its $ 3 billion, or $ 1 billion, incentive program to improve public transit and housing near its new headquarters. That would have done a lot to silence the opposition.
Maybe Blasio and Cuomo have advised Amazon to take such steps early in the process. However, after some unsuccessful efforts late in the game to address local concerns (see here or here), the Seattle giant was tired and punting. Après coup, cependant, le maire de New York a déclaré: «Nous avons donné à Amazon la possibilité d’être un bon voisin et de faire des affaires dans la plus grande ville du monde… Au lieu de travailler avec la communauté, Amazon a jeté cette opportunité.»
[Suiteencours:aprèsleretraitetlesconversationsavecBezoslegouverneurdeNewYorkCuomocherchaà[Ongoingsequel:afterthepulloutandconversationswithBezosNewYorkGovernorCuomosoughtto[Suiteencours:aprèsleretraitetlesconversationsavecBezoslegouverneurdeNewYorkCuomocherchaà[Ongoingsequel:afterthepulloutandconversationswithBezosNewYorkGovernorCuomosoughtto obliger Amazon à revenir – conformément au conseil de cette section: construire une coalition solidaire et traiter avec les opposants. Cuomo a refusé d’approuver la nomination de l’opposant au projet qui aurait pu opposer son veto au siège proposé de Queens. Cuomo a orchestré la publication d'une page complète letter (pdf) à Bezos dans le New York Times, qui comprenait plus de 70 signataires, dont l'AFL-CIO et d'autres syndicats, des chefs d'entreprise locaux, des groupes communautaires, des dirigeants de locataires de logements sociaux, le groupe local N.A.A.C.P. chapitre, pasteurs et élus. La lettre indiqué que Cuomo «badumera personnellement la responsabilité de l'approbation du projet par l'État» et que le maire Bill de Blasio «collaborera avec le gouverneur pour gérer le processus de développement de la communauté». À ce jour, Amazon n'a pas commenté ni fait comprendre que cet effort réussira, mais une telle campagne après coup visant à créer un soutien et à traiter avec des opposants aurait sûrement été plus efficace avant le renversement stupéfiant.]
Rappelez-vous que la négociation ne se termine pas par un «oui», mais nécessite un soutien continu suffisant pour la mise en œuvre et la durabilité.. Le type de campagne de négociation que j’ai décrit est conçu pour créer une "coalition gagnante" suffisante et durable au nom d’une initiative comme celle d’Amazon. Mais, comme le montre cette expérience, un «oui» initial n’est que le point de départ d’un projet réussi, qui nécessite un appui soutenu pour une réussite à long terme.
Si Amazon avait approché la décision du siège de New York conformément aux sept étapes décrites ci-dessus, l'expérience suggère (pdf) que ses chances de succès auraient été beaucoup plus grandes. Bien sûr, Amazon aurait peut-être envisagé cette approche mais choisi DAD à la place. Jouer dur dans ce cas très visible pourrait intimider d’autres villes à la recherche des emplois et de l’essor économique d’une nouvelle installation d’Amazon: «Ne nous poussez pas, sinon nous nous développerons ailleurs». Cette position sans compromis a fonctionné alors que Amazon était menacée. taxes spéciales ou autres mesures lourdes; des exemples incluent le Texas, la Caroline du Sud et Seattle. Pourtant, en se retirant de New York, Amazon a perdu les très réels avantages qui l’avaient amenée à choisir Queens. Et si l’approche en sept étapes décrite ci-dessus n’avait pas porté ses fruits dans un délai raisonnable, Amazon conservait toujours l’option de retrait total.
Même avec un projet valable, il y aura inévitablement des opposants et des opposants; c'est la nature des contextes complexes et multipartites. Mais avoir un doigt permanent sur le pouls des communautés et des groupes impliqués, nourri des alliés, anticipant les opposants et cherchant à répondre à leurs préoccupations, ayant construit suffisamment de soutien et neutralisé suffisamment d’opposants pour submerger ceux qui restent hostiles sans condition, la formation fatale de coalitions bloquantes peut être considérablement réduite – et votre projet a bien plus de chances de réussir.
