What Campaigns Can Teach Lawyers About Negotiating
Legal negotiations aren't too dissimilar from election campaigns, as I've learned from personal experience.
March 15, 2019 at 04:21 PM
4 minute read
Legal negotiations aren't too dissimilar from election campaigns, as I've learned from personal experience. Twice now, I've served as my wife's campaign manager. This time around, the experience taught me some lessons about legal negotiations. Convincing voters to pick my wife as county treasurer over a sitting incumbent isn't that far off from coaxing everyone to a deal.
Listen to your voter. And then listen some more.
Montgomery County has a reputation as the reddest county in Texas. Even still, voters come in many flavors. Some care most about taxes, others about ethics and still others about economic development. Some aren't even Republican at all.
A political campaign must reach enough of these different interests to celebrate on election night. To do that, the campaign must listen to the voter.
The big issue in our campaign took us by surprise. We went in thinking my wife's qualifications and record would most impress the voters. But then, the incumbent chose to fight an open records request for her 700-page accounting procedures manual. The media pounced. Social media exploded. Voters of all types talked.
Message received. Voters saw a problem with transparency.
Lawyers contingency plan everything, including our negotiations. So we can fool ourselves into thinking we already know what the other side will do, say and think. News flash: We don't really know all that.
Listen hard to the other side. Really listen. In a negotiation, the other side is the voter. Don't listen merely to react, but carefully listen to ask questions. Until we've heard opposing counsel articulate her arguments fully, we're only guessing how she'll come at us in trial.
Remember the silent majority.
Noise constantly surrounds a political campaign. Some folks have larger megaphones than others. Think the media, community activists and political groups. They make the most noise. But a campaign needs to listen closer for the silent majority. When they're talking, a message has caught on.
For us, the silent majority came from voters who'd ordinarily back an incumbent with an if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it attitude. We heard that critical group talking transparency. Withholding the accounting procedures manual bothered them. We knew we had an issue on our hands to carry us to election day.
Translate that to legal negotiations. Although trial counsel talks the loudest, the client calls the shots. Listen carefully if the client speaks. It won't be very often, but I bet it's your best insight to the silent majority in your room.
Is the client frustrated with how slowly justice moves? Is he defending a reputation? Does she struggle with having to pay to defend against a claim she thinks is garbage? There's actionable intelligence in there.
Speak the voter's language.
Our campaign pivoted its key issue—to transparency on how our county accounts for taxpayers' dollars. We listened to what got the voters' goat, then drove that message home.
Legal negotiations work the same way. Understand the other side's favorite argument, then dismantle it. Listen between the lines for what scares them, then exploit it. Determine what they want outside the lawsuit, then explain offers in a way that satisfies it.
Wield facts like a scalpel, not like a machete.
Even with the upper hand on a big issue, a campaign can still tank. Overplay a strong hand, and the campaign turns off voters in the political center.
The campaign must wield the facts like a scalpel, not a machete. The facts speak for themselves. Unadorned. Just the facts, ma'am. Inflammatory adjectives simply aren't necessary, and they can inflict more damage on the campaign's credibility than on the opponent.
Adjectives can also tank legal negotiations. Opening session is especially dangerous. If one side overplays its strengths with bombast, negotiations can derail fast. Although lawyers are desensitized to adjectives, clients typically are not.
Adjectives just risk getting the client's back up, so the client stands his or her ground. Clients who want to avoid the courtroom will fold without the adjectives. Playing the facts alone will get there.
If you ever get the chance to manage the campaign for a political candidate you believe in, go for it. You'll hone some skills that help at the bargaining table.
Alan Bush is a mediator in Houston and Conroe. He'll listen, then shoot you straight.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Virtue Begets Virtue': Tips for Practicing Law (and Living) Ethically
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 2Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 3'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 4Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
- 5As a New Year Dawns, the Value of Florida’s Revised Mediation Laws Comes Into Greater Focus
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250