Divorce Balance

Hand’s down, this is the tactic I’ve seen work most effectively in delivering on goals desired as divorce outcomes. At the same time, there’s an important reason why it is under-utilized and otherwise easily exposed by way of sloppy implementation. By definition, “goal setting” requires strategic thinking, prioritization, and discipline. All are rareties in the emotional milieu that instructs most divorce negotiations. The “red herring” approach requires identification of an issue that the other side will plausibly see as important to you, is a higher priority for them, and which, at the same time, you are ready to wholely or… Continue Reading…

This tactic plays on two fronts uniquely available to the other side in divorce negotiations. Many individuals in the process of divorce are insecure: About their decision-making, the reasonableness of the needs they perceive themselves to have, and their ability to self-advocate outside of marital partnership. [1] Folks going through divorce have a high need for external validation — frequently accompanied by a low threshold for differentiating among those from whom they perceive themselves to be judged. [2] Thus, when your spouse or your spouse’s attorney “reacts with an exaggerated facial expression to get you to question the reasonableness of… Continue Reading…

This, and what Bullies, Tyrants, and Impossible People labels “Silence,” exploits what almost seems to defy human nature in a lot of folks. [1-2] If you’re a “rescuer” or “care-taker,” then moments of seeming non-progress in divorce negotiations will likely cause you to feel compelled to rush-in with options, proposed solutions, and even adjustments to the substantively thought-out issues on which you prepared pre-meeting. At the very least, you’re succeptable to thinking you should explain yourself further. [3-6]. Conversely, the disciplined, quiet listener gains advantage. If you’re giving, they simply take in those moves on the negotiating line. If you’re… Continue Reading…

This can be tough to discern when it’s being used as a coercive tactic, because divorce has some very real deadlines as well. [1-3] If you’re trying to negotiate a divorce settlement in anticipation of making an initial Filing that includes a resulting agreement as attachment, the Sword of Damocles (equally available to both) is to bifurcate the process by Filing before that work is complete. The threat is expense, public exposure of issues as they’re consequently sorted out in divorce court, and a whole host of additional system-imposed deadlines. [4] At a subordinate level, there are Motion Hearing deadlines:… Continue Reading…

In the area where I practice, divorce mediators may refer to this as your “Last, Best Offer.” [1] One of the ways in which this is manifest is by opposing counsel: “If you want us to meet for a possible divorce settlement, you’d better come with your last, best offer.” Okay, so what are your options once you get there if these are the terms? They are inviting you to say, “Take it or leave it.” In other words, if you come in with your “last, best offer,” and at any point give concessions after discussion, then your position is… Continue Reading…

This is a tactic very commonly used to gain advantage in divorce negotiations. In my practice, we call it “Man Out of the Room Syndrome.” [1] Or, as Bullies, Tyrants, and Impossible People labels it, “Higher Authority.” [2] The game moves like this. Ostensibly serious divorce settlement negotiations are undertaken between the two opposing sides, sometimes facilitated by a divorce mediator. The impetus is on building momentum and getting a deal done. To that end, you’re encouraged to give hard, because, after all, progress is being made, we’re here anyway — or some other argument that encourages you to taste… Continue Reading…

Yes, Virginia— wolves in sheeps’ clothing can be found even in divorce mediations. [1-2] Authors Ronald M. Shapiro and Mark A. Jankowski (with James Dale) expose the “strategically difficult” type of negotiator in their book titled, Bullies, Tyrants, and Impossible People: How to Beat Them Without Joining Them. [3] These people are difficult because they think that being difficult works. They believe that they have empirical evidence that being difficult as a strategy is the most effective way to get results. It’s one thing, of course, to be concerned that your spouse has brought in a hired-gun for divorce advocacy…. Continue Reading…

This one is often a shocker for people. But, as you can imagine, it’s a good thing for a divorce counselor, and especially a divorce mediator, to know. Things heat up. How long do you allow for them to cool off before you get back into discussions? Relationship expert John Gottman, Ph.D., writes about this in his book, Why Marriages Succeed or Fail. He starts the basics: Heart rate at rest for an average man is about 72 beats per minute (BPM), 82 for a woman. At about 80 BPM for a man or 90 BPM for a woman, he… Continue Reading…

In the early 1980s, most of my consulting work was as what’s commonly called an “executive coach,” and in organizational design. The latter fundamentally means studying interactions between two or more individuals and developing means by which they can best function harmoniously, if not productively. As a result, I found myself in the offices of a lot of very tenured individuals who used The Art of War by Sun Tzu to evidence their toughness, associating their professions with bare-knuckled conflict. [1] The more predominant the display (and even elaborate their copy of this text), the less likely I found them… Continue Reading…

Be careful when an organizational structure advocates co-anything as a leadership construct. Some divorce support groups favor co-facilitated discussions, typically led by one man and one woman (unaffiliated), out of a perception that this supports a better balance in participation and improvements via same-gender connect-ability. I’ve also seen divorce mediations similarly managed. In fact, all the better if the co-mediators have little if any prior experience in even working together before-hand. The argument is that this provides for a purity of direction, solutions more driven from the bottom up. Potential bias is minimized. But at what cost? Everything has a… Continue Reading…