Have you ever wondered why hostage negotiators don’t wear sunglasses? The reason is eye contact is very important in establishing trust. I think HR managers would make good hostage negotiators.” First getting people to like you , then trust you. If you’re caught lying, things will never be the same again.” This is a quote from an experienced hostage negotiator but it sounds like the advice a head of HR would give to their team on how to work with their colleagues in management. Hostage negotiators (HN) often find themselves mediating between the authorities and the hostage taker(s). HN’s need both sides to trust them.
If you work in HR you already know the power of flattery as a way of developing rapport. You want to develop that sense of mutual understanding and interest. You’re advising managers how best to get employees to do what managers want them to do. You share an interest in managing change without conflict or unnecessary pain with the aim of a smooth transition. You are also presenting yourself as a restraint on management actions. Management do have a tendency to expect employees to do what they tell them to do because they are the boss. This mind set can quickly escalate a discussion into an argument and entrenched views on both sides.
In the films the bank robbers surrounded by armed police take hostages to help secure their escape demanding a helicopter or transport to a waiting plane. Terrorists take hostages to demand the realise of those held by the authorities. The aim / priority of the HN is always to secure the unharmed release of the hostages. There are always others present who wish to storm the building rather than enter protracted negotiations with those they consider untrustworthy. manipulative and devious. Their agenda is often to ensure that the hostage takers don’t get away even if it puts the lives of hostages at greater risk. Or in the case of organisations to show them who’s in charge even if this risk the viability of the project.
A hostage negotiation is the use of dialogue to resolve conflict as opposed to threats and force. Management could certainly force through a restructuring, they could threaten job loses and redundancies if changes in working practices are not accepted. They could impose new terms and conditions of employment. Like hostage situations this sometimes happens and as in hostage situations it often goes wrong the business suffers due to resulting poor industrial relations and a tarnished reputation.
The alternative is to negotiate on the understanding that everyone acts in good faith and recognises both sides will have to give up or concede ground. Some years ago after several days of intense negotiations the chief executive of a large organisation was interviewed live on the news. He was asked how he thought the negotiations were going and whether a settlement was insight. His reply was that once the ritual dancing was over he felt the unions would see sense. Needless to say the Union side took these comments to indicate negotiations up to that point had not been conducted in good faith and escalated their industrial action.
