The quid pro quo or exchange of concessions is the essence of the most advanced negotiation techniques: the package or block to create mutual value. Despite the apparent simplicity of the concept it is not easy to realize, because we get tangled up with the simple or because we have to overcome notions about negotiating that are as deep-rooted as they are mistaken.
QPQ implies breaking with the belief that in a negotiation what I gain, the other loses, a mercantile and mistaken understanding of reality. This is true when you have only one issue to negotiate (such as price), but not when you have several things to decide (such as price, terms, services, currency, quality, financing, conditions, additional benefits...).
We have transferred the experiences and customs of buying tomatoes in a traditional market to the complex negotiations of the business world.
The concept of a package or QPQ is that you give the other person something that is very important to them but does not cost you much, and vice versa, you receive in exchange something that is very important to you but does not represent much cost to the other person. Many believe this is rare, a fortunate coincidence, but in practice it is the most common reality.
To negotiate a package, the principle is that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. The different points of the negotiation are explored, finding out each other's interests, until a mutual understanding of each other's priorities is reached. This exchange of information is not easy because most people have the belief and habit of not opening their cards for fear that the other will take advantage of their interests. Most people believe that showing interest in something leaves them out in the open and so they try to be sneaky and not let their interests be known, they try to keep their agenda hidden. This is not how QPQ can be done. It requires the development of trust between the parties and a genuine desire to create mutual value.
In German and U.S. cultures there is an additional difficulty in doing QPQ, because of the habit of breaking up the agenda and negotiating point by point rather than exploring the entire agenda as a whole. In these negotiation cultures people prefer to start with the easiest point, resolve it, and not move on to the second point without having resolved the first. By this procedure the results remain in the mediocre middle ground on each point, which does not give more value to each of the two (at the least cost to both).
It is a paradox that the more differences there are, the greater the possibility of creating valuethrough QPQ. This technique involves knowing each other's priorities and exchanging them. It is not so easy in practice, but it is the reason why some get so much more out of their negotiations. With the interdependence in the customer-supplier chain as well as the increasing complexity of supply contracts, QPQ has become an indispensable tool for business effectiveness.
