Training Your Team to Negotiate Via Text Messaging

In 2009 and 2010, I wrote a series of articles addressing the potentiality of negotiators being faced with negotiating with a person in crisis through text messaging and adapting to changing technology in our attempt to resolve these intense situations. You can read those original articles here and here. Over the past few years, many more agencies are reporting being faced with this eventuality. From across the country, crisis negotiators, team leaders and even a reporter from the Associated Press have been in contact with me talking about their experiences in these arenas. One of the biggest inquiries is how to train and prepare to negotiate through this communication venue.

As technologies have improved exponentially and people become more comfortable communicating in these brief bursts of text, emoticons and abbreviations, our ability to maintain effective communications with people in crisis must grow equally. Two things that we can always count on to change are people and the manners in which we communicate. Consequently, we must retrain ourselves to adapt to these changes to succeed as negotiators.

There are a great number of areas in which technology and text negotiation training can enhance the total training and skills reinforcement for your team. From scenario based Active Listening Skills (ALS) to understanding technology enhancements, negotiation via text messaging brings a new dimension to the art of crisis negotiations. One of the best things that may result from this type of training is the reinforcement of those basic skills on which we rely for each negotiation. We are simply applying them in a unique fashion and working outside our comfort zone to become more effective negotiators.

Scenario Based Training

Many of the scenarios that can be used in this endeavor are generally consistent with any other “person in crisis” scenario. The biggest differences are the inability to identify the true emotions being fed the negotiator, understanding and being comfortable with the communication tool we are using, and viewing the actual words in a new paradigm.

The foundation of every negotiation is the use of Active Listening Skills. Some of these skills may become less effective during this form of negotiation whereby other techniques would need to be employed. To accomplish this, we might imagine that we have lost certain senses such as our sense of hearing. Playing charade based games that do not allow speaking to elicit varying responses from the negotiators is a fun but very effective manner to get them to look beyond their own paradigm to solve the problem. In addition, it is a great team building activity that forces them to rely on each other as they would do during a crisis circumstance. Always remember that crisis negotiation is a team sport.

Emotional Labeling

(Respond to the emotions that you hear rather than the words themselves.)

Assessing received text messages becomes extremely difficult when we begin applying the first component; Emotional Labeling. It has been estimated that there are over six hundred words in the English language used to describe various emotions. No telling how many emoji’s… From our earliest negotiation training we have been taught to listen for and identify the emotions to determine from where the person in crisis is coming. Knowing if they are depressed, anxious, angry, frustrated, or scared will help us create an empathetic bond to reduce their feelings of being alone. This lack of ability to hear those cues with which we have become familiar can have a devastating impact on our ability to respond appropriately.

I previously indicated that it was unfortunate that most people generally do not express these emotions in the written form. I do believe that with the appropriate training and practice, we can develop the ability to better assess emotions by reading the words they text as well as we learned to assess the emotion in their voice. With this in mind, we must be willing to focus more on their paradigm and not that of our own. A single word can hold a depth and breadth of emotions for us to realize if we only open up to the possibilities.

We must begin to consider the actual words in a new light. I have taken paragraphs of some really dull reading and removed all of the punctuation creating some very long, run-on sentences. (A cheap tear-jerking romance novel with two-timing, drug abuse and drinking, domestic abuse, and all the rest of the same crap we deal with on most every call-out, worked pretty well.)   The trainer should read these aloud in a monotone, almost robotic voice. At some point, after the class has thrown things at you and called you disgusting for reading that to them, have them give a brief written response to that person. Pick some of the responses and have them read in the same mono-tone/robotic voice. Without the emotions that are emphasized through the punctuation and voice inflection, the words become more important to the conversation.

Paraphrasing

(Demonstrates you are listening. Summarizes what you have been told in your own words.)

Paraphrasing via text messaging may be limited to only one or two word replies followed by a question mark. This can give the negotiator an opportunity to consult with their coach or to pause for a moment while waiting for a reply…hoping that it does come. Paraphrasing generally allows the negotiator to not only reply to the words, but also to the meanings that appear to be hiding behind those words. Additionally, it provides a great deal of intelligence by delving deeper into the crisis at hand without a great deal of stress and thought.

Reflecting/Mirroring

(Repeating the last word, phrase, or thought along with a question mark.)

Reflecting may be one of the best components of the A.L.S. skill set during a text negotiation. The negotiator can reply with the same concepts as with verbal negotiations. Single word replies allow for the same breaks and consultations as noted above but, remember that the person in crisis is most likely very adept at quick replies. Always be prepared to reply something back to keep them talking.

Effective Pauses

(Silence before or after an important point or a tactic used to encourage the person in crisis to say something to break the silence.)

For the negotiator who is not adept at texting, many of the replies and communications may be delayed. The effect can cause the person in crisis to think you are not replying or worse, do not care enough to respond when they do open up to you. There is again limited use of this component in negotiating via text messages.

Minimal Encouragers

(Sounds made, especially on the phone, to let the other person know that you are listening.)

At best, single text replies such as “really” and “Uh” might provide the desired impact to keep them talking. While it cannot be applied as in voice communications by interjecting the minimal encourager into the exchange, a quick reply of “oh” or “uh” can buy more time and encourage continued communication. The use of an exclamation or question mark after these responses can assist in conveying the message you wish to send.

 

I/We Messages

(Lets the subject know how they are making us feel. Build toward rapport by changing mindsets from you and me toward “we and us”.)

I/we messages tend to be long in delivery which will not bode well during text messaging. Until we have established a significant rapport and then move to inclusive text messages, the use of “we and us”, may go unnoticed as the person in crisis is fixated on the trigger of the present crisis. While this component is limited, do not forget to move toward it as you do gain trust and build rapport.

 

Open-ended Questions

(Questions that cannot be answered with a simple yes, or no. Who, what, when, where, how, but not why.)

Open ended questions again require longer responses which may result in language confusion and tedium on behalf of both parties to the negotiation. More emphasis on short text responses may be more appropriate for this negotiation scenario.

 

Technology

Each negotiator needs to be comfortable with the phone or other device being used to communicate. Remember, it is simply a methodology to send and receive information. In text messaging, the four components of communication are somewhat varied from traditional voice conversation and should be considered individually.

1. Sender:      This is still the person transmitting the intended message. Without voice pitch, inflection, and skills management such as speaking calmly, methodically, pausing for emphasis, mirroring, etc., we have to find a better way to show we are empathetic to the person in crisis and earn their trust.
2. Message:   We must respond quickly, and succinctly to get our true message across. Remember they are at the same disadvantage of limited emotional input in reading our communication. Also, they are still in a crisis state and probably not likely to see these inferences.
3. Receiver: Pretty much the same… The person to which the information is intended.
4. Understanding:     As in general conversation, this is one of the most important components of the communication. Does the receiver grasp the intended message? Without non-verbal cues or guttural utterances that we may listen for in our voice conversations, we can only rely on the text response or… did they become upset because we did not understand them and now believe that we don’t care?

 

As with any unique negotiation methodology, we want to remember to try to transition to traditional voice communication when it is appropriate to do so. Texting may be a good, or your only method to initiate a communication, but the purpose should be to work to transition to direct voice negotiation for a successful disposition of the negotiation. Overall, it is imperative that we work to encourage the person in crisis to trust us enough to use the phone for what it was originally designed and allow us to talk directly to them.