Leverage Hides In The Assumptions

One of the most useful strategic lessons I've ever learned came at a moment when I wasn't sure I belonged in the room.

Early in my career, I found myself preparing to negotiate with a Vice President from Green Mountain Power. I was still relatively new to the utility industry and, to be honest, intimidated.  The person on the other side of the table had more experience, more resources, more influence, and a much higher title than I did.

I remember talking through my concerns with a co-worker. He happened to be a Civil War enthusiast and responded with a story about General Ulysses Grant.  According to the story, Grant grew increasingly frustrated because his officers spent so much time worrying about what Confederate General Robert E. Lee might do next. Eventually Grant had enough.  He reportedly told them:

“I am heartily tired of hearing about what Lee is going to do. Some of you seem to think he is going to turn a double somersault and land in our rear and on both of our flanks at the same time. Go back to your command and think about what we are going to do ourselves instead of what Lee is going to do.”

My co-worker's point was simple.  I was spending all my time thinking about what the Vice President of Green Mountain Power might do to me.  I wasn't spending enough time thinking about what we were trying to accomplish.  That lesson stayed with me.

Years later, I became involved in a transmission dispute focused on cost and found that the Grant story had an even broader meaning.  A construction project had become significantly more expensive than originally anticipated, and the utility that had requested the work didn’t believe it should have to cover the full increased cost.  They argued that all the utilities that used the transmission system should share the burden.

Initially everyone accepted the lens that cost was the issue.  But eventually a different question got asked: “Is the cost overrun the issue, or is it really the rate impact caused by those costs?”  It turned out that the rate impacts, that is the increased customer costs, were the real issue.

Once we saw the problem through that lens options that had previously been invisible suddenly came into view.  Approaches that lowered carrying costs rather than actual costs became viable.  The objective hadn't changed.  The way we evaluated the situation had.  The leverage to solve the issue wasn't hidden in the numbers.  It was hidden inside the assumption that everyone had accepted.

I've seen the same pattern repeat itself throughout my career.  People assume a negotiation must proceed in a certain way.  They assume a regulatory outcome is inevitable.  They assume a larger organization holds all the cards.  They assume the decision has already been made.  When everyone accepts the same assumptions, opportunities hiding in plain sight often go unnoticed.

Once a party understands their own objectives, they can evaluate the situation they are in and the other side’s actions in relation to their own goals.  They can identify assumptions, incentives, constraints, and opportunities that others never notice.

The next time you find yourself facing a stronger opponent, a difficult regulator, or an apparently impossible situation, resist the temptation to spend all your time thinking about what the other side might do.  Instead ask: “What do we want to accomplish?”

Leverage becomes obvious when you're clear about your objective and willing to challenge the assumptions standing in your way. It rarely appears when you're reactin