You will practise trading across several issues in a realistic role-play.
Everything in this module so far has been about trading: if-then offers, shrinking steps, packages and a clean close. The only way to get comfortable with trading is to do it, with someone whose priorities you can't see. This exercise is a role-play built for exactly that, and it comes with a scoring system, so afterwards you can tell whether the two of you found good trades or simply met in the middle.
You need a partner and about 35 minutes. One of you plays a freelance illustrator, the other a small company's marketing lead commissioning a set of illustrations for a product launch. All the figures are invented for the exercise.
Four issues are on the table. Each has three possible settings, and each side scores every setting differently. Here are the issues, with the freelancer's points and then the client's points for each setting:
Fee: S$3,000, S$3,500 or S$4,000. Freelancer scores 0, 40 or 80. Client scores 40, 20 or 0. Deadline: three, five or eight weeks. Freelancer scores 0, 10 or 20. Client scores 60, 30 or 0. Revisions included: three rounds, two or one. Freelancer scores 0, 10 or 20. Client scores 40, 20 or 0. Payment: all on completion, 30% upfront or 50% upfront. Freelancer scores 0, 20 or 40. Client scores 10, 5 or 0.
Each side also has a reservation point. The freelancer won't sign a deal worth less than 60 points to them. The client won't sign one worth less than 50.
Here's the important part. Before you start, each of you should cover up or ignore the other side's scores. The freelancer looks only at the freelancer's numbers, and the client only at the client's. In a real negotiation you'd have to guess the other side's priorities, so play it that way. If you've both already read everything, ask a third person to run the exercise and give each of you only your own column.
Take two minutes to prepare, using what you've learned. Which issues matter most to you? Which could you give up cheaply? What would you open with? Write an if-then offer or two, in the style of lesson 5.1, Every concession gets something back, and build at least one package from lesson 5.3, Put several offers on the table at once.
Give yourselves 15 minutes. Open with questions before numbers, as lesson 4.2 suggested. Trade with if-then offers. Put at least one package on the table. If you reach agreement, summarise it item by item, the way lesson 5.4, Close the deal and write it down, describes. If you reach 15 minutes with no deal, stop. No deal is a legitimate result, as long as it's because no option beat your reservation point.
Write down the final terms for all four issues.
Now reveal both columns and score the deal. Add up each side's points for the four settings you agreed.
Here's a worked comparison to measure yourselves against. Suppose a pair splits every issue down the middle: S$3,500, five weeks, two revisions and 30% upfront. The freelancer scores 40 plus 10 plus 10 plus 20, which is 80. The client scores 20 plus 30 plus 20 plus 5, which is 75. Both are above their reservation points, so it's a deal, and it looks fair.
Now suppose a pair notices, through questions and packages, that the client cares a great deal about speed and revisions and much less about the fee and payment, while the freelancer is the other way round. They agree S$4,000, three weeks, three rounds of revisions and 50% upfront. The freelancer scores 80 plus 0 plus 0 plus 40, which is 120. The client scores 0 plus 60 plus 40 plus 0, which is 100. Both sides do better than in the split deal, the freelancer by 40 points and the client by 25.
The difference between those two deals is the value created by trading across issues instead of compromising on each one. Splitting every issue looked fair, but it left points on the table for both people. Giving each side the issues it valued most produced more for both.
Talk through three questions together. Which trade created the most value, meaning the one where one side gave up a little and the other gained a lot? When did you first realise what the other side cared about, and what gave it away? Was there a moment when one of you was tempted to split the difference, and what happened?
Real negotiations don't come with points tables, but they work the same way. The issues each side values most are rarely the same, and the deals that serve both people best come from finding that out. The activity asks you to record your final terms and name the single trade that made both of you better off.
Run the role-play, record the final terms, and write which trade created the most value for both sides.
Junxiong-WFG Organisation is an authorised representative of AIA Financial Advisers Private Limited (Reg. No. 201715016G).