The result of the European referendum in June 2016 triggered an earthquake in political and economic affairs. It presented one of the most significant challenges to governments and private companies in years. As a negotiator who has participated in many bilateral and multilateral negotiation processes, I would argue that, from a professional perspective, Brexit offers a chance to think differently. Read more: The political forecast for 2017? Economic precarity and social division
Dealing with terrorists or cybercriminals is different to dealing with your mother-in-law: with terrorists you can negotiate. But where on the scale would the upcoming Brexit negotiations fall?
If we were to judge from the recent tough statements coming from Theresa May, Angela Merkel and François Hollande, it seems as though negative emotions and strong sense of revenge identify the Brexit negotiations as more of a bitter family conflict rather than a hostage negotiation.
Often in environments such as this, negotiation experts will call both parties to try to reduce tensions or just to compile a list of confidence-building measures in order to create trust. From our experience in dealing with terrorists, cybercriminals, political rivals and family conflicts, seeking trust or conditioning the process, let alone the outcome, on "confidence" between the two hurt parties carries a risk of failure. In the context of Brexit, once we manage to see through the hostile public statements, failing to reach a jointly beneficial outcome is not an option.
Negotiating in a low-to-no trust environment represents a situation wherein a party has no alternate counterpart to negotiate with, apart from the one they don't trust. Negotiating with low-to-no trust means negotiating with someone who hurt you, caused you damage, or with whom you've already declared war. This environment represents not only a reality absent of trust, but rather the existence of a strong, solid and deep-rooted mistrust. Within the context of the Brexit negotiations, both sides see no other alternative that satisfies their interests rather than to reach a negotiated agreement.
Once the table for the Brexit negotiation is set, both parties should adopt an alternative paradigm consisting of three main elements. The first is public atmosphere - legitimising negative feelings towards the other side in the public eye. In this situation, all parties involved feel hurt and angry. It is imperative for both sides to create a legitimacy for that sentiment. This being said, it should fall short of so-called "operational revenge acts" such as increasing economic barriers.
The second element at the negotiation table, and also within the public sphere, is to move from trust to respect. In many cultures, even within the EU, the concept of respect and honour determines personal, political and business moves. People will give up materialistic interests in order to satisfy their commitment to maintain honour or gain respect. Unlike trusting an untrustworthy partner, respecting the other side, even committing certain acts to show this respect, carries no risk. If Brexit negotiations, on the national or private enterprise level, will be based on reciprocal respect, rather than seeking trust, chances for a stable outcome increase significantly. Read more: On the anniversary of the EU vote, here are eight ways Brexit has hit science, tech and design
The third element is a bit fuzzy for those unfamiliar with the professional language of negotiators, but it's probably the most crucial one. A cornerstone component in any crisis negotiation is building a reliable joint process with the bad guy that both sides can trust. This is not trusting each other, but rather trusting the joint process. Interestingly enough, Brexit negotiations will be conducted by process-oriented individuals. Their challenge will be to create a process which is neither EU oriented nor UK determined, but co-owned by both parties.
These three elements will have to be executed using clear communication, quid pro quo concession exchange (rather than the irrelevant "confidence-building measures"), and a comprehensive strategy for using negotiators, mediators and process facilitators.
Brexit negotiations represent a reality that none of the parties involved have experienced before. Political and business leaders might believe that all negotiations are the same: however, professional experience shows that this is never the case. Innovative thinking could be the make-or-break factor for these negotiations. When it comes to debating whether to adopt innovative rather than conservative, negotiation thinking, one needs only to refer back to the SAS slogan: "Who dares wins."
This article was originally published by WIRED UK
