Winning Bids with Reduced Conflict

Most negotiations don’t fail because people lack arguments. They fail because people argue the wrong thing. This carousel isn’t about clever lines or pressure tactics. It’s about how value is actually created in real negotiations. Here’s how to read what you’re about to swipe through. 1. Start with value, not position Most negotiators defend positions. Great negotiators explore value. When you start with yes or no, you shrink the pie before the discussion even begins. When you start with what does this unlock, new options appear. Think of a supplier pushing price versus one exploring delivery timing, risk reduction, or volume planning. Same deal. Very different outcome. 2. Separate people from the problem When people feel attacked, they protect themselves. When they feel respected, they collaborate. This isn’t about being soft. It’s about keeping the conversation productive when stakes are high. You can be firm on the issue and respectful with the person at the same time. 3. Trade — don’t concede Concessions leak value. Trades create it. If something has value to the other side, it has value back to you. Giving something away just to move on trains the counterpart to wait for more. 4. Make value visible If value isn’t visible, it doesn’t exist in the decision. Cost reductions. Risk removed. Time saved. Revenue protected. This is where negotiations become a math problem, not a debate. 5. Use trust as a currency Trust isn’t nice-to-have. It’s measurable. High trust lowers transaction costs, speeds decisions, and reduces the need for legal safeguards. Low trust does the opposite — and both sides pay for it. 6. Design the decision — don’t push it People resist conclusions they didn’t help shape. Strong negotiators don’t push outcomes. They design choices, scenarios, and options — and let the counterpart choose the path. 7. Think long-term, even in one-off deals Short-term wins often destroy long-term value. A simple test: Would you accept this deal again? Would you recommend this counterpart? SMARTnership negotiation isn’t about being nice. And it’s not about being tough. It’s about creating measurable value, reducing risk, and building outcomes that last. Negotiation is a skill — not a talent. And it can be learned. #negotiation The Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School World Commerce & Contracting BMI Executive Institute BMI Alumni Executive Club UCLouvain I BMI Executive Institute AAU Executive - MBA and HD at Aalborg University Tine Anneberg Gražvydas Jukna Juan Manuel García P. Jason Myrowitz Tiffany Kemp Moïse NOUBISSI Said A. ,(MBA, EFQM) Francisco Cosme Dr. Tarun Rochwani

A GC I worked with started running mandatory pre-construction meetings on every project over $500K last year. Not the kickoff meeting where everyone introduces themselves and reviews the schedule. A different meeting. The pre-con meeting was 90 minutes. Attendees: GC's PM, GC's superintendent, owner's rep, and every sub with a scope over $50K. The agenda: walk through every ambiguous line in the plans and specs. Identify every point where the design could be interpreted two different ways. Assign responsibility for clarifying each one in writing before mobilization. Sounds tedious. Feels like it slows things down. On one of the first projects they ran the new process on, they identified 14 specific ambiguities in the drawings. Things like: "the mechanical drawings show ductwork routed through a wall the architectural drawings don't show a chase in, whose scope is the chase?" "The lighting plan shows fixtures in a location the reflected ceiling plan shows a soffit." "The finish schedule shows tile in this bathroom but the room finish plan shows sheet vinyl." Each of those ambiguities would have become a change order fight 4 months into the project. Some in the GC's favor, some against, all requiring negotiation, delay, and disruption. By resolving them in the pre-con meeting with the owner's rep in the room, they got clean written direction on all 14 items before anyone poured concrete. Total change orders on that project: 3, all owner-initiated scope changes. Zero design-ambiguity disputes. Compared to their previous 12 months of similar projects: average 11 design-ambiguity change orders per project, each requiring 2-4 weeks of negotiation and roughly 3-5% margin loss. The pre-con meeting felt slow. It cost them 90 minutes on the front end. Saved them roughly $80K in margin loss on that one project. Now they run it on every project over $500K. Their design-dispute change orders dropped 70% company-wide within a year. If you run projects with any complexity, the pre-con ambiguity meeting is one of the highest-ROI 90 minutes you'll ever schedule. Do you have a formal process for resolving design ambiguities before mobilization?

I was managing an $8,000,000 build in Santa Monica. One contractor's bid was the lowest bid by $400,000. (A significant difference from the other bids) As a general contractor working with subcontractors.  Or  As a developer working with a general contractor. This dilemma is incredibly common. It’s our job as the leader to discern:  • Does the lower bid have sound reasoning behind the decrease?  • Or, is the decrease unwarranted & worth dismissing? Here’s 3 areas to watch out for,  As a passive investor, as a new developer, as a new contractor,  To understand if a bid is properly priced: 1) Normalize the scope before you compare the total with other bids. • A low bid number means nothing until every bidder is carrying the same scope, same quality level, same allowances, and the same inclusions/exclusions.  • That also matters contractually: under AIA guidance, allowances are placeholders, and if actual costs differ, the contract sum gets adjusted by change order.  • So a “cheap” bid built on light allowances is often just deferred cost. 2) Look at the pattern of the low price, not just the price. • If one or two scopes are dramatically low, that is usually a red flag.  • The World Bank guidance is useful here: if the lowest bidder is below others by roughly the same percentage across many subtotals, that can sometimes reflect lower overhead, lower profit, or a more efficient setup.  • But if some items are nominal and others are inflated, FHWA and GAO treat that as unbalanced bidding, which may not produce the lowest ultimate cost. 3) Stress-test the schedule and the handoff scopes. • A suspiciously low bid paired with an aggressive schedule is usually another warning sign, not a bonus.  • If the bidder is vague on sequence, sleeves/penetrations, utility tie-ins, temporary protection, or finish transitions, the number is probably incomplete rather than superior. P.S. Anything you’d add to the 3 that have helped you properly price construction bids? 

Repeat after me: I will share my budget with the supplier. I will share my budget with the supplier. I will share my budget with the supplier... Catch my drift? Keeping the budget secret from suppliers is a huge mistake. I learned this lesson the hard way. A while back, I was asked by a stakeholder to hold back the budget in a marketing tender. We’d see if we could drive down costs by making suppliers “guess” what we were willing to pay. The result - A disaster. We got agency bids that were all over the place—from five times the budget to a tenth of it. We lost time, suppliers were frustrated, and we had no clear solution. In the end, we had to go back to the drawing board and wasted a lot if the agencies time. Since then, I’ve changed how I work. I now share the budget with suppliers and, in return, ask for transparency. My approach is simple: "Here’s the budget. Bid open-book and show your margins.” If a supplier won’t agree? They’re out. The bids I got since are more thoughtful and focused. If we, in procurement want it to really be about value, not just cost, we need to stop treating suppliers as adversaries. Too often, we set them up to fail. Here are some of the ways it happens: • Last-minute RFPs – We want quality responses, but we give suppliers impossible timelines. It’s unrealistic. • Withholding key details – Holding back critical info to “see what they come up with” only creates bad assumptions and wastes everyone’s time. • Relentless cost-cutting – When every conversation is about squeezing their margins, suppliers lose trust. Why bring their best ideas to the table when they’re constantly on the defensive? • Treating suppliers as commodities – When we act like every supplier is interchangeable, we get just that: average solutions. Suppliers who feel valued bring their best; those who don’t, won’t. Sharing budgets, asking for transparency, and setting fair expectations isn’t soft—it’s smart. It leads to innovation, better solutions, and genuine partnerships. Have you tried being open about budgets? How did it change the conversation? #procurement #savings #negotiation

Strong Negotiators Don’t Just Push Harder - They Play Smarter Most procurement negotiation advice is wrong: - "Push for the lowest price" - "Dominate the conversation" - "Stick to your first offer" The real power moves aren’t always obvious. Great negotiators don’t just demand better deals - they create them. They walk into every conversation with clarity, leverage, and strategy. A mindset that will help you: - Control the negotiation before it starts - Shift focus from price to total value - Build leverage through data, not pressure - Turn suppliers into partners, not just vendors Winning isn’t about pushing harder. It’s about negotiating smarter. Here are 9 negotiation tactics to secure better deals and stronger supplier relationships: 1️⃣ Prepare Like a Pro ↳ The best negotiators win before the meeting starts. ↳ Walk in with market data, benchmarks, and a clear game plan. 2️⃣ Start with the Right Anchor ↳ Set the first number whenever possible. ↳ A strong opening shapes the rest of the deal. 3️⃣ Turn Price Talks Into Value Talks ↳ Instead of “We need a discount,” ask, “How can we improve efficiency?” ↳ Frame the conversation around long-term cost savings, flexibility, and risk mitigation. 4️⃣ Use Silence as a Tactic ↳ After making a request, pause. ↳ Suppliers often fill the silence with better terms. 5️⃣ Ask the Right Questions ↳ “What would make this a win-win for you?” ↳ Questions uncover hidden value and supplier motivations. 6️⃣ Leverage Competition Wisely ↳ “We have other options” is powerful - but don’t bluff. ↳ Real leverage comes from credible alternatives. 7️⃣ Be Ready to Walk Away ↳ The strongest position is having a backup plan. ↳ If the deal doesn’t work, don’t force it - find a better one. 8️⃣ Get More Than Just Price Concessions ↳ If price won’t budge, negotiate better payment terms, service levels, or added value. ↳ Sometimes, extras are worth more than a discount. 9️⃣ End With an Open Door ↳ Even if you don’t close now, leave room for future deals. ↳ Relationships often matter more than one contract. 💡 The best deals aren’t won at the table - they’re shaped before the conversation even starts. What’s your #1 rule for winning supplier negotiations? Let’s discuss! ♻️ Repost to help others negotiate smarter. ✅ Follow Miroslav Pitlanic for more insights on procurement, sourcing, and business transformation.

How you lose deals in late-stage negotiations (9/10 times it’s not about price) I don’t panic when procurement gets involved. I don’t offer discounts before understanding the full ask. I don’t mistake “We need a better price” for “We’re not interested.” Late-stage negotiations aren’t just about price - they’re about power. Weak negotiation leads to: - Endless back-and-forth with no decision - Unnecessary discounts that kill your margins - Prospects choosing a competitor at the last minute After 210 deals won here’s what I focus on instead of playing defense: 1. Price objections are rarely about price When a prospect says, “This is too expensive,” I don’t immediately negotiate. I ask, “Compared to what?” Then, “If price weren’t the issue, is this the right solution for you?” Half the time, it’s not about cost - it’s about hesitation. Solve that first. 2. Never negotiate without trade-offs If they ask for a discount, I don’t say, “Sure, let me check with my manager.” I say, “If I can make the numbers work, can we sign by Friday?” Every concession needs a commitment. Otherwise, you’re just giving things away. 3. Procurement is not the enemy Procurement’s job isn’t to say no - it’s to get the best deal for their company. I get ahead of this by asking my Champion, “What’s their process? What do they care about most?” The more I understand their priorities, the easier it is to close the deal. 4. Deadlines are your best friend If a deal drags, it dies. I don’t just “check in” and hope for the best. I say, “Let’s set a decision date so we can align resources on both sides. What works for you?” No urgency = no movement. My Late-Stage Negotiation Framework: • Confirm real objections (Is it really price or something else?) • Negotiate with trade-offs (Always get a commitment in return) • Align with procurement early (Know their process before they stall the deal) • Set a clear deadline (And stick to it) The result? - Fewer ghosted deals. - Fewer unnecessary discounts. - More closed-won. Late-stage negotiation isn’t about who blinks first - it’s about who controls the process. Ps. what’s one negotiation move you swear by? Happy Tuesday y''all. JBTHEAE - 🤓 Like this? Please hit the follow button - I just hit my 30.000k contact limit and can't accept new contacts atm. Working on it! #sdr #ae #coldcalling SDRs of Germany

Public low-bid work is stressful for a simple reason: people mix up two different decisions. Every bid has two components: Cost What it will actually take to build the job: • Quantities • Production rates • Means & methods • Risk • Sub and vendor cope • Schedule reality Cost is an engineering and operations problem. It should be grounded in facts, history, and real execution. Margin How much you choose to make: • Market conditions • Backlog and capacity • Competitive landscape • Risk appetite Margin is a business decision Where bids go wrong 👇 Teams blur the line. They: • Pad costs to “feel safe” • Hide margin inside unit prices • Adjust production instead of pricing strategy That’s how you lose discipline. It’s really hard to not blur the lines. The best contractors I know are ruthless about this separation: • Cost = truth • Margin = strategy They lock in cost first. Then they deliberately decide how aggressive to be. Low-bid doesn’t mean low-thinking. It means you need clarity, not gut feel. If bid day feels nerve-wracking, ask yourself: Did we clearly separate cost from margin - or did we blend them together? That distinction is the difference between guessing… and bidding with intent.

Here’s a popular sales question that backfires. It usually comes out when the prospect pushes back on price: “What happens if you do nothing?” The prospect thinks, Here comes the cross-examination. They know the rep is baiting them into justifying the purchase. That creates resistance. Price is the last refuge when the prospect doesn’t see a meaningful difference. If they believe they can get the same thing for less, why choose you? Better to illuminate knowledge gaps. A few months ago, I got three bids to renovate my home. I told the most expensive contractor the other bids were cheaper. He didn’t justify his price or get defensive. Because when you rationalize price, you sound desperate. And he didn’t ask, “What’s the cost of hiring the wrong contractor?” I wouldn’t have known how to answer. Instead, he poked the bear. He asked questions that made me stop and think: “Did the other contractor mention what type of moisture barrier they were using?” “Are they using hollow-core or solid doors?” “What about the plumbing—are they replacing it or reusing your 16-year-old pipes?” Each question exposed a gap. Suddenly, the cheaper bids didn’t look so cheap. I hired him. He didn’t lower his price. He raised my awareness.