Negotiation | Consultant & Professor with 30+ years of global experience | Negotiation by Design | Negotiation Institutional Capacity Building | #NegotiationByDesign | Dutiful Advocate to my Clients |

Need to strengthen your negotiation strategy and drive more profitable deals?

As a global negotiation consultant and professor, I help organizations build an Institutional Negotiation Capacity—transforming negotiation into a strategic advantage.

I’ve spent three decades honing my craft—originally sparked by a chance encounter in a negotiation workshop led by Roger Fisher. 

That serendipitous moment ignited my passion for negotiation, and since then I’ve guided executives, entrepreneurs, and leaders at world-renowned institutions like the Kellogg School of Management, McGill University, and Columbia University’s ICCCR.

At Negotiation by Design®, we go beyond surface-level tactics. We embed negotiation into your organizational DNA, cultivating a shared language, continuous learning, and long-term strategic advantage. 

Fluent in Spanish, English, and French, and backed by degrees from Columbia University, DePauw University, and an EMBA from Kellogg, I bring a nuanced global perspective to every client engagement.

My personal life—parenting Mateo and Anabel, exploring trails on my mountain bike, and cooking up a storm—has taught me that the best lessons often arise from unexpected moments. These experiences remind me that true negotiation mastery combines skill, humility, and a human touch.

Together, let’s transform how your organization negotiates—unlocking better deals, stronger relationships, and sustainable results.

Ready to unlock your team’s full potential? 

Click “Connect” or “Message” me now, and let’s explore how I can support you.

Or book a meeting at  https://calendly.com/negotiationbydesign

Pablo Restrepo

If you’re getting louder, you’re getting weaker. 

Volume is a power substitute. 
Calm is a power signal.

We’ve all seen it: the meeting heats up, someone raises their voice… and suddenly the real conversation dies.

Here’s the dirty secret: the louder you get, the less influence you have.

Research and practice across negotiation and leadership keep pointing to the same pattern:
	
• Listening isn’t passive. It’s a power move. 
The calmer you get, the more information you collect, and information is leverage.
	
• Emotions hijack deals. 
Once you trigger threat mode, people stop solving problems and start protecting their ego.

• Anger rarely scales. 
What intimidates subordinates usually fails with equals (or anyone who has options).

• Your voice is part of your argument. 
Tone and pace shape credibility as much as the words do.

• Listening multiplies influence. 
When people feel heard, they share more, soften faster, and resist less.

• Connection beats debate. 
If you build understanding before pushing your position, you reduce polarization and unlock movement.

• Negotiation is collaboration under tension, not theatrics. 
If you need volume to “win,” you’re negotiating your insecurity, not the deal.

Next time you feel your volume rising, try this instead:

Lower your voice. 
Ask one precise question. 
Mirror their last 6 words.

That’s how you take control without “winning” the room.

What’s your go-to move when the other person gets loud?

undefined undefined

Helping Individuals, Organizations and Governments in Negotiation | 30 + years of Global Experience | Speaker, Consultant, and Professor | Proud Father | Founder of Negotiation by Design |

Ever negotiated with someone who smiled while taking everything from you?

It's a brutal game. Some people don't bargain.
They harvest control and call it a “deal.”

After 30 years in high-stakes negotiations, I've learned one thing:
The key is to spot the pattern, understand the motive, and counter the tactics.

A helpful lens: the dark triad, not a diagnosis, just observable behaviors that often line up with these traits.

1️⃣ The ice-cold taker (psychopath)
How to spot them: 
They rush decisions, treat concessions as weakness, ignore relationship talk, zero curiosity about your constraints.

What drives them?
One-off value capture + control.

How to counter:
	• Put offers + commitments in writing (reduce pressure theater).
	• Make claims verifiable: “What evidence supports that?”
	• Use contingencies: “If X is true → Y. If not → Z.”

2️⃣ The puppet master (Machiavellian)
How to spot them: 
Heavy flattery, vague promises, shifting stories, side conversations, selective transparency.

What drives them?
Information asymmetry and narrative control.

How to counter:
	• Share info in slices (never vent, never overshare).
	• Send a 5-bullet recap after every call. “Here’s what we agreed / open items / next steps”.
	• Ask precision questions: “Who decides?” “By when?” “What would prove it?”
	
3️⃣ The peacock with a knife (narcissist)
How to spot them: 
Dominates airtime, needs the “win,” dismisses input, performs confidently, takes credit fast.

What drives them?
Status protection + ego wins.

How to counter:
	• Offer a face-saving path: “Here’s the headline you can sell internally.”
	• Set process rules: agenda, criteria, decision rights.
	• If needed: Change the table (bring the real decision-maker, change the sequence, or add alternatives).

One more thing: sometimes "cold" isn't pathology, it's pressure.
So diagnose before you label.

What’s your earliest “tell” that it’s about control, not value?

Trust doesn’t “happen” in negotiations.

It’s built on purpose, or you leave value on the table.

The Program on Negotiation at Harvard shows this clearly.

Without trust, negotiators play defense.
- They hide information.
- They limit concessions.
- They accept smaller deals.
- No trust means “safe” agreements.

With trust, they take smart risks.
- They share information
- They create value.
- Trust makes better agreements possible.

If you need to build trust fast, here are 6 moves that consistently work:
	
• Speak their "language".
Learn their terms, norms, and unspoken rules before you walk in.
	
• Borrow credibility.
Use trusted references, proof of execution, and a visible track record.
	
• Name mutual dependence.
Make it clear what both sides lose if talks fail, without threatening.

• Give a low-risk first concession.
Something cheap for you, meaningful for them, no immediate payback required.

• Label what you gave.
Don’t assume they noticed.
Say what it cost you and why you did it.

• Explain the “why” behind demands.
Constraints ≠ greed.
Context preserves trust.

My go-to line when I need trust quickly:
“Here’s the constraint I can’t change, and where I can be flexible.”

Is there another move you use to build trust fast in negotiations, and why does it work?
Share in the comments; I'd love to learn from your experience.

Six Trust Booster in Negotiation to Better Deals

This is what losing a negotiation at home looks like.

Not because negotiating with kids is “easy.”
Because they’re the purest negotiators on earth:

They don’t care about your title.
They don’t fear your authority.
They don’t politely hide what they want.

They go straight for emotion, leverage, and logic; in that order.

After 30+ years of teaching negotiation, the biggest upgrades to my skillset didn’t come from boardrooms.

They came from my kitchen.

Here’s what my children taught me that works with anyone:
	
1️⃣ If they feel unheard, logic is useless

You can have the best argument in the world…
and still lose.

So I start with:
“Help me understand what matters most to you.”

Not soft. Strategic.
	
2️⃣ Positions are noise. Interests are signal

Kids say: “I want to go.”
Adults say: “We need this clause.”

Same thing. Same mistake.
The real question is always:
“What problem are you trying to solve?”
	
3️⃣ Boundaries beat lectures

Long explanations invite debate.

Clear boundaries create clarity:
“I’m open to this, under these conditions.”
	
4️⃣ Timing is leverage

When emotions are high, you don’t need better words.
You need a better moment.

Pause. Reset. Return.
	
5️⃣ Fairness is subjective, so negotiate the definition

Kids don’t want “equal.”
They want “fair.”

Executives do the same. They just use spreadsheets.

So I ask:
“What would fair look like to you, specifically?”
	
6️⃣ You don’t need to win the moment; you need to win the relationship

With kids, you learn fast:

If you “win” by force, you lose trust.
And trust is the currency of every future deal.

That’s the lesson most negotiators learn too late.

Because the hardest counterpart isn’t a CEO.
It’s someone who knows you… and isn’t impressed by you.

Have your kids ever out-negotiated you?
What did they do that you secretly respected?

Sales negotiation is not about being persuasive.

It’s about using the right sales negotiation techniques at the right moment.

Most deals are lost before the price is even discussed.

Why?

Because negotiators:
– React instead of re-anchoring
– Argue value instead of framing constraints
– Explain too much when silence would work better

Sales negotiation techniques that work:

1️⃣ Control the anchor
The first number shapes the entire conversation.
If you can’t go first, re-anchor with context, not just a counter-number.

2️⃣ Frame constraints, not criticism
Don’t tell them their offer is bad.
Explain why it doesn’t work for you.
Criticism creates resistance. Constraints invite problem-solving.

3️⃣ Talk about losses, not gains
Buyers don’t move faster for upside.
They move faster to avoid regret, delay, and missed opportunities.

4️⃣ Split concessions. Bundle requests.
Small concessions feel lighter.
One clear ask feels more reasonable than five small ones.

5️⃣ Stop over-explaining strong offers
If your value is clear, say less.
Extra justifications weaken your position.

The best sales negotiators don’t push harder.

They frame smarter.

Question for you:
Which of these sales negotiation techniques do you see most often done wrong?

Let me know in the comments.

Your next negotiation starts before you open your mouth.

Pass these filters, and your leverage quietly multiplies.

A simple mental checklist to run before you open your mouth.
Especially when emotions are high.
	
0️⃣ Raw thought (unfiltered)

“What’s the first thing that comes to mind?”

Don’t suppress it.
Notice it.
Don't say it 

This is your signal, not your message.
Raw thoughts are data.
Speaking them unfiltered is a choice.

1️⃣ Intention check

"Why am I about to say this?"

Ask yourself:
	• Am I trying to advance the conversation or win the argument and moment?
	• Am I seeking clarity, or am I venting frustration?
	• Would this move us closer to an agreement, or just feel satisfying?

Negotiation insight:
If you intend to punish, educate, or humiliate, stop and reframe.
	
2️⃣ Choice check

"Does this need to be said, by me, right now?"

Ask yourself:
	• Is this essential to the issue at hand?
	• Can this wait?
	• Is there a better person, moment, or format to say this?

Negotiation insight:
Not everything true is useful.
So do not say it.

Not everything useful is timely.
So do not say it now.
	
3️⃣ Compassion check

"Can I acknowledge how this might land emotionally?"

Ask yourself:
	• What might the other person be feeling right now?
	• How might this trigger defensiveness, fear, or loss of face?
	• Can I soften how I say this without diluting what I say?

Negotiation insight:
You don’t have to agree in order to be respectful.
Tone is a strategic choice.
	
4️⃣ Empathy check

"Can I see this from their side of the table?"

Ask yourself:
	• What story might they be telling themselves?
	• What constraints, pressures, or incentives are shaping their behavior?
	• If I were in their role, what would feel fair?

Negotiation insight:
Understanding their logic does not weaken your position.
It strengthens your influence.
	
5️⃣ Respect and impact check

"Would I be okay hearing this said to me?"

Ask yourself:
	• Will this embarrass them, especially in front of others?
	• Does this attack the problem or the person?

Negotiation insight:
Respect preserves the relationship capital you may need later.

6️⃣ Listening check

"Have I actually listened, or just waited to speak?"

Ask yourself:
	• Did I give them a real chance to explain?
	• Did I test my assumptions?
	• Am I responding to what they said, or to what I think they meant?

Negotiation insight:
Most “difficult people” are reacting to not being heard.

🗣️ Final output: speak, or don’t

Only after passing through these filters do you decide:
	• Say it as-is
	• Say it differently
	• Say it later
	• Don’t say it at all

That decision is a negotiation skill.

The Filter Method for Difficult Conversations

Most companies don’t have a negotiation capability.

They've only got a workshop.

And they confuse the two.

General negotiation training is like buying a gym membership.
You feel motivated.
You feel disciplined.

Until the first real deadline hits.

Then the org’s default “negotiation system” takes over:
	•	Discount to close
	•	Concede to preserve “relationship”
	•	Escalate late
	•	Improvise terms
	•	Win the meeting… lose the margin

Here’s the sober truth:

General training creates vocabulary.
Domain-specific training creates performance.

Because capability isn’t what people know.
It’s what the organization can reliably produce, deal after deal, without hero negotiators.

Why general training fails (by itself):

1. Transfer breaks under pressure
People don’t apply principles.
They run habits triggered by familiar situations.

2. Pressure reveals defaults
You don’t rise to theory.
You fall into what you’ve rehearsed.

3. Capability lives in a system
And a real system needs:
	•	A credible champion (peer-respected)
	•	A common language across functions
	•	A shared way of working to prepare, run the process, and learn fast through after-action reviews

“Don’t concede without trading” means nothing until you define:
What is a trade in your domain?

If you stop at general training, you didn’t build capability.
You hosted an event.

Quick poll: Where does your org leak the most value?
Sales / Procurement / Partnerships / Disputes

Share your answer below.
Let's see where the real gaps are.

When you get a “no” in negotiation, stop persuading...

... and start diagnosing.

Because most negotiators hear "no" and think:
“Let me explain better.”
“Let me convince harder.”
“Let me add pressure.”

That’s not negotiation.
That’s panic with vocabulary.

A “no” is data.
And it usually belongs to one of these 3 buckets:
	

1. Misalignment
They’re saying "no" because you’re missing something fundamental.

A) You’re not meeting their interests/priorities.
Ask: “What’s your #1 priority here?”

B) You’re violating their fairness beliefs.
Ask: “When you say ‘fair’, what standard are you using?”

C) They don’t trust you (intent or delivery).
Ask: “What would make this feel safe to say yes to?”
	

2. Constraints
They’re saying "no" because the system around them blocks a "yes".

A) Real restrictions (budget, policy, timing).
Ask: “What’s truly non-negotiable vs just default?”

B) Better BATNA.
Ask: “If we disappeared, what would you do instead?”

C) Wrong stakeholders.
Ask: “Who can say yes, and who can kill this?”
	

3. Tactics
They’re saying "no" because they’re playing a game.

A) Bluffing.
Say: “Help me understand what makes that final.”

B) Win-lose mindset.
Say: “I don’t trade concessions. I trade value.”

C) Predators/hardball.
Say: “We proceed only with a clear process + everything in writing.”


Your job after a “no” isn’t to be more persuasive.
It’s to be more precise.

Because persuasion without diagnosis is just noise with confidence.

Which “no” do you face most often: misalignment, constraints, or tactics?

The best gift you can give your Valentine today isn't a box of chocolates. 🍫 

It’s a simple question: "How do you need me to show up right now?" 

In a world of constant pings and notifications, our presence is the rarest currency we have. 
But presence without direction can sometimes miss the mark. 

Next time your partner (or even a teammate) shares a challenge, don't guess. Ask if they need: 

👂HEAR: They just need a safe space to vent. No solutions, no "I told you so," just active listening and validation.  

🤗 HUG: They don't need words at all. They need physical or emotional comfort and the feeling of being supported.  

🆘 HELP: They are looking for a brainstorm partner, a strategy, or a literal hand to solve the problem. 

Why this works: 
  - It eliminates "support friction." 
  - It honors their specific needs over your instinct to "fix." 
  - It turns a standard conversation into a moment of true connection. 

The "full presence" we always talk about in negotiation starts at home. Today, give the gift of being truly seen and heard. 

Happy Valentine’s Day to those celebrating! ❤️ 

How do you prefer to be supported when you're stressed? Let’s hear it in the comments. 👇

Your counterpart said yes.

Their coalition can still say no.

Most deals aren't just between two people.
There's always a crowd behind the scenes.
They can approve, delay, sabotage, or kill the deal quietly.
Even when it looks like a win.

That's why the real game isn't convincing the other side.
It's managing their entire coalition, and your own.

Enter the stakeholder chessboard.
A simple way to stop guessing.

Plot every key person on two questions.
- Do they trust us?
- Do they want and agree with this?

From there, every stakeholder becomes one of five characters, and each requires a different move:

𝗔𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘀: 
Trust you and want the deal.
Private support is useless if it stays private.
Turn it into visible advocacy.
Give them a role.

𝗨𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗱:
Are uncommitted and easy to “capture.”
Engage them early.
Use a clear story.
Ask for small commitments.

𝗢𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀:
Trust you, but disagree.
That’s valuable resistance.
Convert it through tradeoffs.
Co-design the path forward.

𝗕𝗲𝗱𝗳𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄𝘀:
Want the outcome but don’t trust you.
The fix isn’t more selling.
It’s de-risking.
Use guardrails, pilots, and fast proof.

𝗔𝗱𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘀:
Don’t trust you and don’t want the deal.
Contain them with the process.
Create visibility.
Force constructive dialogue.

But the hidden lever is sequence.
Approach the wrong people first, and you lose momentum.
The story gets written without you.

The order matters:
1. Allies first, to create public support and leverage.
2. Undecided next, capture them before they drift.
3. Opponents then, after you have social proof.
4. Bedfellows, once direction is aligned, to make “yes” safe.
5: Adversaries last, only when you're strong, not desperation.

Signed does not mean done.
The real question is this:
Who is shaping your deal after the meeting ends?

Stakeholder Mapping in Negotiation

“We walk the unmistaken path one mistake at a time.”

That’s basically the learning loop in negotiation.

Because in negotiation, you don’t get “good” by reading frameworks.

You get good by running loops:
Prepare → act → observe → adjust → repeat

And yes, your loops will be messy.

You’ll:
	• Anchor too soft and spend the rest of the deal chasing margin.
	• Talk more than you listen and miss the real interest.
	• Accept a “reasonable” offer that’s worse than your BATNA (ouch).
	• Share information too early… or too late.
	• Confuse confidence with certainty.
	• Win the argument and lose the relationship.

None of that means you’re bad at negotiation.

It means you’re negotiating in the real world.

The problem isn’t making mistakes.

The problem is making mistakes with no feedback system.

So here’s the negotiation learning loop I swear by: Keep it simple, keep it brutal.

After every important conversation, debrief with 4 questions:
	• What did I think was happening… that wasn’t? (My story vs reality)
	• What signal did I miss? (Emotion, power, timing, incentives)
	• What did my counterpart learn about me? (And did I want them to?)
	• What’s my one adjustment for next time? (One, not ten)

That last question is the whole game.

Because negotiation mastery isn’t “being right.”

It’s getting better faster.

One loop at a time.
One mistake at a time.
Until the path looks “unmistaken” from the outside.

What’s the most useful negotiation mistake you’ve made, one you’d never repeat now?

Ever had a deal collapse because the other side was being “irrational”?

It’s tempting to walk away and blame their ego.

But in 2026, top-tier negotiators know “winning” against a biased counterpart is a myth.

If they can’t see the value, you both lose.

The real power move?

Don’t exploit their bias, neutralize it.

Here are 3 ways to “debias” your counterpart and save the deal:
	
1.	Kill the “fixed-pie” myth
Most people default to believing that for them to win, you must lose.
This “mythical fixed-pie” stops them from exploring tradeoffs.

The fix: Don’t argue over one slice, like price.
- Introduce multiple issues at once: delivery speed, payment terms, exclusivity, etc.
- This forces the brain to shift from “competing” to “problem-solving.”
	
2.	Use “irrationality” to build contingent agreements
If they are overconfident about a future outcome, don’t try to prove them wrong.

Use it.

Example: “Our sales will double by Q4!”

The fix: Propose a “bet” inside the contract.
- “If sales double, we pay X.”
- “If they don’t, we pay Y.”

This bypasses the bias.
Both sides feel they’ve won on their own estimates.

3.	Give them “thinking space.”
Biases like escalation of commitment and egocentrism thrive under pressure.
A forced fast decision often triggers a defensive “No.”
Not a rational choice.

The fix: After a strong proposal, encourage 24 hours to review it.
- Suggest they get an “outsider’s perspective.”
- This lowers the heat.
- It helps their rational “System 2” thinking kick in.

The bottom line: A biased negotiator is an uncreative negotiator.

Your goal isn’t to be the smartest person in the room.

It’s to help the other side be smart enough to say “Yes.”

Which negotiation bias do you find most frustrating to deal with? 
Let’s discuss in the comments.

Three ways to "debias" an irrational negotiator

Qué gusto leer esto, Nicolas.

Me entusiasma muchísimo el aporte que traes a Negotiation by Design: una mezcla rara y valiosa de método, criterio, y experiencia real en contextos complejos, multiculturales y de alta presión. Se nota que tu manera de negociar no viene de la teoría, viene de años de construir confianza, mapear actores, leer el contexto con curiosidad y llegar preparado para crear valor, no para “ganar” a punta de regateo.

Y me encanta la historia completa: la semilla en 2004, el recorrido por el mundo y el regreso con propósito para poner esa experiencia al servicio de otros. Eso dice mucho de ti.

Ojalá este inicio sea el principio de una relación larga, sólida y muy fructífera. Hay mucho por construir juntos y muchos clientes que se van a beneficiar de lo que estás trayendo a la mesa.

 ¡Vamos con todo, y por más almuerzos celebrando proyectos exitosos! 🍊

De reconexiones, caminos de la vida y propósito.

A Pablo Restrepo  lo conocí a inicios de mi carrera profesional. Era el año 2004 y Colombia negociaba el Tratado de Libre Comercio con Estados Unidos, mejor conocido como el TLC. Yo trabajaba en la Dirección de Inversión Extranjera del Ministerio de Comercio y asistía a las reuniones de preparación del TLC.  Pablo y su empresa Tandem, asesoraban al gobierno colombiano para construir y ejecutar la mejor estrategia de negociación. 

Desde ese momento, algo resonó en mi con el tema de negociación. Me gustaba la idea de ver los asuntos de manera amplia y no bajo el tradicional esquema adversarial y de regateo, tan propio de nuestra cultura latina. Además, había organización y método, lo cual ayudaba para aumentar la visibilidad, identificar fortalezas y debilidades, y llegar a las negociaciones con un plan previamente acordado. No simplemente a jugar una partida de póker en la mesa del más poderoso. Ahí… una semilla se sembró. 

Después, decidí que mi camino profesional debía cambiar, buscar nuevos horizontes y explorar el mundo. Durante 12 años, tuve la fortuna de vivir en Ecuador, Malasia, Mexico, Rusia y Estados Unidos. Muchas cosas evolucionaron en ese tiempo, la familia creció, los equipos de trabajo y las responsabilidades aumentaron y, aunque los retos profesionales eran diferentes, siempre construí con base en la confianza, el respeto y la preparación, como elementos universales para enfrentar los retos con resultados exitosos. 

Si bien, en el papel, mi responsabilidad eran los asuntos legales y corporativos, en el fondo mi interés e influencia trascendían más allá. Aprendiendo a leer los contextos con curiosidad, escanear y conectar actores con empatía, y dibujar mapas de relaciones para buscar soluciones a asuntos complejos.  Entonces, recurrentemente pensaba… ¿No es eso, acaso, lo que hace un buen negociador? ¿No es eso lo que me ha permitido transitar satisfactoriamente negociaciones comerciales, resolución de un conflictos o crisis inesperadas?

Por eso, después de muchos años de vida corporativa alrededor del mundo y tras un proceso de transición enriquecedor al regresar a mi país, lo busqué y le dije… Pablo: en Colombia y en el resto del mundo, aún hay muchas cosas por hacer, muchos caminos por explorar y clientes que necesitan entender el poder de la negociación en su justa dimensión; porque solo así, se puede comprender todo el valor que se puede crear y las relaciones de confianza que se pueden afianzar, dejando atrás los egos y generando valor. 

Fast forward… 22 años después, acá estamos, disfrutando una buena comida dominicana, juntando método con experiencia, y alineando esfuerzos para empoderar a organizaciones e individuos para alcanzar su mayor potencial en negociación.    

Negotiation by Design 🍊 … off we go!

The biggest risk in your deal isn’t price.

It's the invisible veto you don't see coming.

Every "1:1" deal hides a crowd behind the scenes.
In multilateral negotiations, this crowd becomes the real battlefield.

More parties mean more vetoes, more politics, more ways for the deal to die before it ever lives.

Most so-called bilateral negotiations are actually two coalitions facing each other.

If you don't map stakeholders on both sides, you're negotiating blind.

Here's the brutal truth: you can close the deal with your counterpart and still get killed internally.
Signed is just the start.
Implementation is where deals go to die, on both sides.

That's why I use the Stakeholder Chessboard.

It's a simple model built on two questions:

1. Trust: Do they believe us?
2. Agreement: Do they want this?

Plot everyone, on your side and theirs.

Stop guessing.

From there, every stakeholder is one of five characters:

• Allies: high trust, high agreement.
Turn them into advocates, give them roles, arm them with talking points.

• Undecided: not committed.
Engage immediately, simplify options, and ask for small wins.

• Opponents: high trust, low agreement.
Treat resistance as gold. Co-design solutions. Trade protections for support.

• Bedfellows: low trust, high agreement.
Stop selling. De-risk with guardrails, pilots, and clear commitments.

• Adversaries: low trust, low agreement.
Contain and expose blockers. Use clear processes and forced constructive dialogue.

Question: Which character is blocking your deal right now?
Allies, Undecided, Opponents, Bedfellows, or Adversaries?
Identify them.
Stop guessing.
Start winning.

Stakeholders Mapping in Negotiation

Remi Smolinski

Negotiation professor, seasoned executive and advisor passionate about technology, innovation, sustainability and growth, experienced in:  negotiation training, coaching, and consulting, innovation management, strategic foresight, venture building, digital transformation, strategy development and execution, business development,  corporate development, internationalization, sustainability.

taplio

The Battle

Pablo Restrepo

Remi Smolinski

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScorePablo Restrepo's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Pablo Restrepo

Remi Smolinski

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Pablo Restrepo's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScorePablo Restrepo's LinkedIn Performance