Ethical Considerations in Negotiation

How to sell (without feeling salesy): First, understand the Ethical Wealth Formula: (Value First × Trust Building) × Authentic Positioning  ———————————————————  Frequency of Asks × Pressure Tactics This isn't abstract theory. It's practical math: • Increase the numerator: deliver more value, build more trust, position more authentically • Decrease the denominator: reduce frequency of asks, eliminate pressure tactics • Watch revenue soar while your integrity remains intact Ethical doesn't mean unprofitable. It means sustainable. Principle 1: Value-First Monetization The approach that generates $864,000 monthly without a single "hard sell": • Deliver so much value upfront that buying feels like the obvious next step • Create free content so good people say "If this is free, imagine what's paid" • Solve small problems for free, big transformational problems for a fee Give until it feels slightly uncomfortable. Then give a little more. Principle 2: Trust Through Consistency I've never missed weekly content in 3 years, through vacations, illnesses, market crashes. The trust-building machine that works while you sleep: • Show up reliably when competitors disappear during tough times • Do what you promise, when you promise it • Maintain quality across every touchpoint One founder implemented this and saw conversions increase 74% in 30 days, without changing offer or price. Trust isn't built in grand gestures. It's built in boring consistency, most won't maintain. Principle 3: Authentic Positioning The approach that helped me raise prices 300% while increasing sales: • Own your expertise unapologetically, confidence is not arrogance • Speak to specific problems you solve, not vague benefits you provide • Tell detailed stories of transformation instead of listing features You don't need to be perfect to sell effectively. You need to be authentic about how you help. Principle 4: Invitation Vs. Manipulation The ethical alternative to high-pressure tactics: • Invite people when they're ready, don't push when you're ready • Create genuine scarcity (limited capacity) not fake urgency (countdown timers) • Respect "no" as "not now" rather than objection to overcome My most profitable sales sequence has zero countdown timers, zero artificial scarcity, zero pressure. Ethical selling feels like extending help, not hunting prey. — Enjoy this? ♻️ Repost it to your network and follow Matt Gray for more. Want to improve your sales strategy? Join our community of 172,000+ subscribers today: https://lnkd.in/eTp4jain

Don’t just say yes to reviewing a contract I’d do this instead... ➟ Pause to get the full context on the spend ➟ Check the stakeholder has actually reviewed it ➟ Clarify the procurement role as distinct from that of legal In this post 👇 1. Why procurement managers get this wrong (the subservience trap) 2. How to reframe this positively for stakeholders 3. Defining the legal & procurement roles 4. The process enablers Let's start with the subservience trap: 1️⃣ Why procurement managers get this wrong. We're so conditioned to help and so focused on risk mitigation we jump straight in and often miss ↳ The full context for the contract ↳ An opportunity to explain procurement's role ↳ That we're not legally trained and should be open about this Example: This stakeholder has contacted us for the first time and we want to jump in and prove how helpful we are. We're so happy to be involved we give a comprehensive review on the whole document, distracting from how we add the best value. 2️⃣ How to reframe this positively with stakeholders ↳ Say 'yes' to the things you can review (commercials, SLAs, key risks) ↳ Explain the contract review process with a simple RACI ↳ Outline the standard timescale for review ↳ Loop in legal straight away 3️⃣ Defininig the procurement and legal roles Clarify with the stakeholder legal's responsibilities: ↳ Reviewing contract terms for legal risk, enforceability, and regulatory compliance ↳ Ensuring data privacy, IP, and confidentiality protections ↳ Drafting or approving clauses around liability, indemnity, and termination ↳ Negotiating on complex or non-standard terms Do the same for procuremnent's responsibilities: ↳ Commercial terms review: pricing, scope of work, SLAs ↳ Operational & practival review: governance structures, shedules, compliance with procurement policies ↳ Commercial risk & business exposure: e.g. any restrictive obligations, termination clause feasibility 4️⃣ The process enablers Because contract reviews can be onerous ↳ Develop a set of standard T's & C's for your business with legal ↳ Provide one pagers or FAQs covering: (i) when legal review is needed (ii) common red-flag clauses to watch for (iii) Definitions of tricky legal terms in contracts (iv) Contact points for legal support ↳ Provide simple process maps or RACI charts ↳ Host short training or awareness sessions with stakeholder groups Finally, some pro tips: ➟ Don't assume the typical stakeholder understands the difference between legal role and that of procurement ➟ Communicate regularly with stakeholders and be realistic with timescales ➟ Get in writing your business stakeholder has also reviewed and understood the contract. ➟ Don't try to cover the gaps in your legal team resource by stepping outside what you're trained to review. _________ Follow this & you'll provide 10x more value than just saying 'yes' & overstepping your role I promise! Repost ♻️ if this helped.

10 Signs of Greenwashing 🌎 Greenwashing is the practice of misleading stakeholders about the environmental performance or impact of an organization. As scrutiny on sustainability claims intensifies, it is essential to understand how deceptive communication can be structured to appear credible while masking material issues. These ten signals offer a framework for identifying and assessing potential greenwashing across products, campaigns, and corporate strategies. The use of vague or unregulated terminology is one of the most common indicators. Phrases such as “green,” “eco,” or “planet-friendly” often lack precise definitions, making them difficult to verify. Without clear metrics or recognized standards, such language obscures the real environmental attributes of a product or initiative. Another frequent tactic involves promoting environmentally improved products while the rest of the business remains environmentally harmful. For instance, spotlighting a sustainable product line does little to offset the impact of operations that rely on unsustainable energy sources or cause significant pollution. Visual strategies can also mislead. The use of natural imagery (such as leaves, animals, or landscapes) can signal environmental responsibility even when it is unrelated to actual practices. These visual cues are designed to evoke emotional trust rather than reflect verifiable impact. Some claims focus on marginal improvements that are largely irrelevant in the broader environmental context. Highlighting a single recyclable element or the removal of one ingredient may distract from systemic issues, such as supply chain emissions, toxic waste, or overproduction. Competitive positioning is often used to imply superiority. Declaring a product or company as “best in class” within a polluting or underregulated sector does not ensure environmental leadership. Being slightly better than industry peers does not equate to aligning with global environmental thresholds or scientific guidance. Certain claims lack basic credibility. Labeling harmful products as sustainable, regardless of minor adjustments, undermines the seriousness of environmental communication. No amount of offsetting or rebranding can make inherently harmful activities environmentally sound. Technical jargon or complex metrics that are inaccessible to most audiences can create the illusion of scientific rigor. If a claim depends on data that only experts can interpret, it limits public accountability and may conceal the absence of independent verification or robust methodologies. Finally, the absence of evidence or the fabrication of sustainability credentials is a critical concern. Claims that cannot be traced to data, third-party audits, or public reporting mechanisms should be treated with skepticism. Reliable sustainability communication is grounded in transparency, traceability, and consistency. Source: Futerra #sustainability #sustainable #esg #business #greenwashing

Last week, an employee came to me after reporting her manager for harassment - trusting HR to keep it confidential. Instead, HR passed the complaint to the manager's boss, who told the manager everything. By week's end, her manager had turned her words into a threat - and her job into a target. Here's what being a former corporate counsel taught me about HR's quietest, biggest lie: When HR says "This conversation is confidential," they mean: "Everything you say will be documented, distributed, and potentially used against you.” I've sat in those meetings. I've seen the reports. I've watched the aftermath. The truth? Your "confidential" conversation gets shared with: 1. Your direct manager 2. Their manager 3. Legal department 4. Executive team 5. Anyone deemed "relevant" to the investigation But it gets worse. Remember those "performance issues" that suddenly appeared after your complaint? That's because HR took your vulnerable moments and reframed them as evidence: "She admitted feeling anxious" becomes "Unable to handle workplace pressure" "He mentioned being distracted" turns into "Lack of focus and productivity" "They expressed concerns about the team" transforms to "Not a cultural fit" I've watched this playbook destroy careers for years. Now I'm helping employees protect themselves. Three rules I want you to remember: 1. Document everything BEFORE going to HR 2. Assume every word will be shared 3. Get things in writing - after any verbal conversation, send a follow-up: "As discussed today…" Protect yourself first. The company already has an entire department doing the same. Follow for more insider insights on protecting your workplace rights. #EmploymentAttorney  #CaliforniaEmploymentLaw  #EmployeeRights

My Uber driver Emmet and I were having a lovely conversation on my way to the airport yesterday. We talked about living in North Carolina, about our spouses, and our children (my 2 and his 4). And then Emmet asked me, "Do you know my #1 tip for having good relationships?" I waited for him to say "respect" or "generosity" or even "love." But his response? "Manipulation. I have good relationships with my wife and kids because I get them to do whatever I want." Barf. I asked him if maybe he meant influence instead of manipulation, but he was committed. And I believed him. Now admittedly, I've manipulated my loved ones a time or two. (Jacob and Sophie STILL won't forgive me for sneaking Greek yogurt into their mac and cheese 15 years ago.) But manipulation isn't my M.O. Yet it is for countless leaders I've coached who don’t fully understand the difference between manipulation and influence—and how that difference can make or break trust. Here’s a quick comparison: Influence is about partnership. Manipulation is about power. Influence invites choice. Manipulation removes it. Influence is transparent. Manipulation hides the agenda. Influence builds trust over time. Manipulation erodes it—fast. Influence says “here’s what’s in it for US.” Manipulation says “here’s what’s in it for ME.” And while some people might think manipulation is “just being strategic,” it actually comes with real costs. It damages relationships, creates resentment, and teaches others to distrust your intentions. So how do we stay on the right side of the line? Here are 3 practices I teach (and try to live by): 1. Check your intent. Are you trying to get your way at any cost, or are you seeking a mutual win? 2. Give people agency. Let them say yes, no, or ask for more information. 3. Be honest about your ask. Influence works best when everyone knows what’s on the table. Manipulation might get you short-term results. But influence is how you build long-term relationships—at work, at home, and even in the back of an Uber. #leadership #executivecoaching #influence

Cultural awareness isn’t a ‘soft skill’—it’s the difference between a win and a loss in negotiations. I’ve seen top leaders close multimillion-dollar deals and lose them, all because they misunderstood cultural dynamics. I learned this lesson early in my career. Early in my negotiations, I assumed the rules of business were universal. But that assumption cost me time, deals, and valuable relationships. Here’s the thing: Culture impacts everything in a negotiation: - decision-making, - trust-building, and - even timing. Let me give you a few examples from my own experience: 1. Know the "silent signals": In one negotiation with a Japanese client, I learned that silence doesn’t mean disagreement. In fact, it’s a sign of deep thought. It was easy to misread, but recognizing this cultural trait helped me avoid rushing and respect their decision-making pace. 2. Understand authority dynamics: Working with a Middle Eastern team, I found that decisions often come from the top, but they require the approval of key family members or advisors. I adjusted my strategy, engaging with the right people at the right time, which changed the outcome of the deal. 3. Punctuality & respect: I once showed up five minutes early for a meeting with a South American partner. I quickly learned that arriving early was considered aggressive. In that culture, relationships are built on patience. I recalibrated, arriving at the exact time, and it made all the difference. These are the kinds of cultural insights you can only gain through experience. And they can’t be ignored if you want to negotiate at the highest level. When you understand the subtle, but significant, differences in how people from different cultures approach business, you’re no longer reacting to situations. You’re strategizing based on deep cultural awareness. This is what I teach my clients: How to integrate cultural awareness directly into their negotiation tactics to turn every encounter into a successful one. Want to elevate your negotiation strategy? Let’s talk and stop your next deal from falling apart. --------------------------------------- Hi, I’m Scott Harrison and I help executive and leaders master negotiation & communication in high-pressure, high-stakes situations.  - ICF Coach and EQ-i Practitioner - 24 yrs | 19 countries | 150+ clients   - Negotiation | Conflict resolution | Closing deals 📩 DM me or book a discovery call (link in the Featured section)

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐕𝐚𝐥𝐮𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐋𝐨𝐧𝐠-𝐓𝐞𝐫𝐦 𝐑𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 Recruitment is known as a fast paced industry, but there’s one part of our role as recruiters that can’t be rushed; building relationships. In my experience, creating long-term relationships with our clients, candidates, and colleagues is invaluable. Not only does this approach lead to better hiring decisions, but it also shapes careers, fuels business growth, and creates networks of trust that last for years. Here’s why long-term relationships should be the foundation of any great recruitment strategy: 𝟏. 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐄𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞  The best partnerships – whether with clients or candidates – aren’t built in a single conversation. They develop over time, through consistency, honesty, and delivering results. When businesses work with recruiters they trust, they gain a true partner, not just a service provider. The same applies to candidates. Many of the strongest hires come from professionals we’ve known for years and placed more than once. 𝟐. 𝐀 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐓𝐨𝐝𝐚𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐁𝐞 𝐚 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐓𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐰 One of the most rewarding aspects of long-term relationship-building is seeing how careers evolve. Many candidates we’ve placed early in their careers have gone on to become hiring managers or senior leaders, and when they need to build their own teams, they often return to the recruiters they trust. A single placement can turn into a lifelong professional partnership. 𝟑. 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩𝐬 𝐋𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐁𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐇𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬  Understanding a company’s culture, leadership style, and long-term growth strategy takes time. The deeper that understanding, the better the hires. Clients who treat recruiters as strategic partners rather than short-term vendors see the biggest return on investment – not just in speed to hire, but in quality and retention. 𝟒. 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬  In today’s job market, candidates expect a personal, transparent process – one where they feel valued beyond a single application. A recruiter who stays in touch, offers advice, and provides genuine career guidance builds relationships that last. And when candidates have a great experience, they refer others, expanding the recruiter’s network even further. 𝟓. 𝐋𝐨𝐧𝐠-𝐓𝐞𝐫𝐦 𝐑𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩𝐬 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐮𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧  The recruitment industry is built on trust and reputation. The most successful recruiters are the ones known for honest, long-standing relationships that create value for both businesses and professionals over time. At the end of the day, recruitment is about people, not transactions. The strongest partnerships aren’t measured in placements but rather in careers built, businesses grown, and trust earned.

On power moves and how to navigate them. Every time you talk to someone, there is a power dynamic. If you need something from them, they have the upper hand. The same is true if they are a high-status individual (politicians, investors, people with a history of success, etc.). Whatever your request is, they have the leverage. There is nothing wrong with that. In most human transactions, there is a power play. The problem is that many people act like they are in a position of power when they are not… Think of these scenarios: - You're a first-time founder without much traction asking a VC for investment - Reaching out to a stranger on LinkedIn to sell your product - Proposing a call with a potential partner or client without sufficient trust-building - Requesting a colleague to undertake tasks outside their responsibilities In these situations, you're not just making a request but navigating a delicate balance of power. A common mistake is to act as if you're in a position of power when you're not. This approach can come across as presumptuous and may turn people off. So, how do you make your request effectively without overstepping? - Be respectful — This goes a long way across cultures. - Offer context — Clearly explain why you're reaching out and what led you to them specifically. - Build trust — Establish a connection before making significant requests. Trust is a currency in professional relationships. - Be authentic — Share your genuine reasons for needing help. Authenticity can bridge many gaps in power dynamics. - Make it clear you're asking for a favor, and they're not obligated to comply. That would not guarantee success, but it’s a better start. Acknowledging the power dynamic isn't a sign of weakness; it's an understanding of the natural power plays in human interactions.

Do you like to stand out? 🏆 And what does your culture think about it? I grew up in a culture where standing out was the norm. With a strong competitive spirit and an individualistic mindset, we were encouraged from a young age not only to be the best but also to proudly declare our achievements to the world and emphasize how remarkable we are. Then I moved to Asia and slowly began to notice that standing out at work is not always appreciated. In Singapore, there is even a Singlish phrase for it: ‘Don’t spoil market!’ Why? Mainly because, in many cultures, the group is considered more important than the individual. If you think you are the best, it implies that others are not. In other words, if you try too hard, you might make everyone else look bad or less accomplished compared to you. 💡 Wow. I must admit, it was not easy. Suddenly, my ‘natural’ behaviour, which had previously received positive feedback, was met with negative vibes. 😢 But it was also an insightful moment. The fact that standing out could be perceived as an advantage in one culture yet seen as a disadvantage in another is what makes cultural differences so fascinating. Today, every time I witness these differences at work, it reminds me of how important it is to balance these two approaches, as each carries its own beauty and potential danger. ⚖ When working in global teams, there are times to stand out and times to stand back. Being willing to flex our behaviour based on each situation is what matters most. How did you grow up? Does your culture encourage you to stand out, blend in, or simply be the best without declaring it? 😄 #culturaldiversity #globalmindset #culturalintelligence

Are You Persuading or Manipulating? A young manager once asked me, “If the goal is the same, does it matter how we get there?” Yes. It matters a lot. The difference between persuasion and manipulation comes down to intent. - Manipulation controls—twisting facts, playing on fear, or using pressure for personal gain. - Persuasion influences—using facts, logic, and shared values to inspire action. I once worked with a leader who always got buy-in, but people followed out of fear. Another leader? Same results—but with trust, respect, and enthusiasm. The difference? Transparency, choice, and integrity. Great leaders don’t trick people—they empower them. So, ask yourself: Are you convincing people or coercing them? The best leaders win hearts, not just decisions. What’s your take? Have you ever experienced the difference between persuasion and manipulation? Let’s discuss!  #Persuasion #Manipulation #Leadership #Trust #professionalgrowth