Negotiating With Clients

I used to dread negotiations early in my career... Then I realized: Being a strong negotiator isn’t about confrontation. It’s about developing the right frameworks. Here are five game-changing approaches to  negotiate every deal more effectively: 🤝 The 4 Phases Framework (h/t: Roy Lewicki) Great negotiators don’t jump straight to bargaining.  They follow a structured process: • Preparation (lay the groundwork) • Information Exchange (build mutual understanding) • Bargaining (explore potential solutions) • Commitment (secure the agreement) 💪 The BATNA Strategy (h/t: Roger Fisher & William Ury) Your power in any negotiation comes from knowing  your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA). It’s your safety net, your source of confidence.  Always define it before you start. 🎯 The Negotiation Matrix (h/t: Lewicki & Hiam) Different situations call for different strategies: • High stakes? Compete. • Building a long-term relationship? Collaborate. • Minor issue? Avoidance might be best. • The relationship is too critical? Accommodate. • Both matter equally? Compromise. 🤔 The Harvard Principled Negotiation Method (h/t: Fisher, Ury & Patton) This is a game-changer: Focus on interests, not positions. Instead of asking what they want, ask why they want it. That’s where real value creation happens. 🎯 The ZOPA Framework (h/t: Fisher & Ury) The Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA) is where deals get made. Understanding both sides’ limits helps you identify common ground. Everything else? It's just noise. Key takeaway: The best deals happen when both sides feel heard. And the most successful negotiators aren’t the most aggressive. They’re simply the most prepared. ♻️ Find this valuable? Repost to your network. 💡 Follow Eric Partaker for more on business & leadership.

How I Review Contracts (Without Wasting Hours) Most people read contracts line by line from the start. I don’t. That’s the slowest way to catch red flags. Instead, I reverse-engineer them to spot risks first. Step 1: Get the Big Picture – What’s this contract actually about? Who has more power in the deal? This tells me what to watch out for. Step 2: Find the Risks – I jump straight to liability and termination clauses. Can my client walk away if things go south? Are they taking on unfair risks? Step 3: Follow the Money – I check payment terms, penalties, and refunds to make sure there are no vague or sneaky conditions. Step 4: Watch for Dispute Traps – Jurisdiction and arbitration clauses can quietly make legal battles expensive or one-sided. I flag them early. Step 5: Dig Into the Fine Print – Standard clauses like indemnification, non-compete, and amendments often hold surprises. I don’t skim them. Step 6: Read Line by Line – Only after flagging key issues do I read everything carefully, making sure nothing slips through. This method saves time, catches hidden risks faster, and makes contract review way more efficient. Want me to break down a contract using this? Let’s talk.

I Review Any Contract in 7 Minutes and this is my method that actually works in practice. Most lawyers waste 40 minutes reading line-by-line and still miss the real red flags. MINUTE 1 — Identify the “Control Clauses” Every contract has 3 clauses that decide who wins: A) Term , B) Termination, & C) Liability If these are vague or one-sided, nothing else matters. Fix these first. MINUTES 2–3 — Money, Obligations & Timelines I check ONLY: A) Payment amount, B) Payment schedule, C) Penalties, D) Performance obligations, & E) Deadlines 90% of disputes come from these 5 things. If they’re unclear, the contract is a litigation invitation. MINUTE 4 — Definitions Undefined terms = loopholes. Over-defined terms = traps. I scan for: A) “Shall/May” misuse, B) Ambiguous words, & C) Hidden obligations buried in definitions MINUTE 5 — Indemnity + Confidentiality These are the most weaponised clauses. I only check 2 things: A) Who indemnifies whom? & B) For what exactly? If this clause is unlimited, then your client is dead. MINUTE 6 — Dispute Resolution If this clause is drafted lazily, you’re headed for: A) Wrong jurisdiction, B) Wrong seat, C) Expensive arbitration, & D) Delays. I rewrite this in almost every contract I review. MINUTE 7 — Final Sanity Check I quickly scan for: A) Conflicting clauses, B) Missing annexures, C) Internal inconsistencies, & D) Signature issues A contract is not good because it's long. It’s good because it’s clear. This 7-minute flow is what I use daily and what I teach at Aethel Legal International to help lawyers review like problem-solvers. #LawStudents #LegalCareer #ContractDrafting #ContractReview #CorporateLaw #internship #LegalSkills #DraftingSkills #AethelLegal #PracticalLaw #Lawyers #LegalIndustry

Civil trial frequently involve an ocean of documentation, many of which are of little relevance or importance to the dispute issues. Frequently, the rate of relevancy is low. All too often, a bundle of 10 000 pages is handed in at court, and only 600 pages are referred to in evidence, argument or the judgment.    This disease, Death by Documentation, continues to spread. It should be avoided. Here are a couple of tips aimed at achieving that.   Firstly, in relation to each document, the question to ask is “what role will this document play in proving our case, or disproving the opposition’s?” If there is no obvious answer to that one, why is the document included in the evidentiary bundle?   Secondly. I am in favour of using extracts from lengthy documents. Don’t include a 200 page contract of which only four pages are going to feature in the court case and on an extract of the relevant pages will suffice. A similar point can be made in relation to annual financial statements, tenders and just about every prospectus relating to publicly traded shares.    Focussing on what’s important is also crucial, when presenting the evidence. The court clock is ticking, and you’re supposed to be directing the judge’s attention on the important elements of your case. Don’t, therefore, lead a witness through all of the documents, chronologically. The boredom this induces is massive. Refer to the portions of the documents relevant to a specific topic, finish that topic and move onto the next one.    Try to avoid having witnesses read a five page letter into the record. Take them to specific paragraphs, and sentences, demonstrating whatever it is you’re highlighting. If the evidence does require paying attention to a lengthy extract from a document, ask the witness to read it to themselves, not out loud, and indicate to you when they’re done. Rest assured that the judge will, at the same time, be reading the indicated parts of the document.    Always remember the displeasure expressed by the SCA in KPMG v Securefin at questions aimed at a witness what a document means. The Court is, for the most part, able to make its own reading and interpretation. It’s far better to ask how what is stated in a document influenced the subsequent conduct of the party.    Ultimately, it comes down to this - minimise the number of documents used in court, and maximise their effect on the determination of the issues.    Getting to that point takes time and effort. Good luck with the journey. 

We all know that the best price doesn’t always correlate with the best value. But we’re often still taught (or instructed) to negotiate for price instead of value. So, it’s time we talk about how we can rethink negotiating along the price-value matrix. Firstly, to get the best value, you need to understand what your values are. If you value having the lowest price, then congratulations – we’re done already! But if your value depends on factors like quality, ethics, or how quickly you can deliver, then you have a different base from which to negotiate from. Next, you need to evaluate how your supplier’s values align with your own. In other words, where is their primary focus? The more aligned your values are, the simpler the negotiation becomes, and the fewer compromises you need to make. Speaking of which, decide what you’re willing to compromise on before you enter the negotiations. 💡 For example, if your focus is ethics, are you willing to bend on quality or price or delivery? Understanding which values, you can and cannot be flexible on will help you negotiate confidently and effectively. In a nutshell, to negotiate for value, you must first understand your values. #Negotiation #BestAdvice #Procurement #Value

⚖️ Types of Evidence in Law ✅️ Here’s a structured breakdown of the 7 major types of evidence used in courts, along with definitions, examples, rules and practical uses: 1. Direct Evidence Definition: Proves a fact directly without inference Examples: Eyewitness testimony, confession, video of the act Rule: Must be relevant and credible; subject to cross-examination Use: Establishes facts conclusively and powerfully 2. Circumstantial Evidence Definition: Requires inference to connect to a fact Examples: Fingerprints at a crime scene, phone location data Rule: Must be logically relevant and not misleading Use: Supports conclusions when direct evidence is missing 3. Documentary Evidence Definition: Written or recorded material used to prove facts Examples: Contracts, emails, CCTV footage, text messages Rule: Must be genuine, relevant, and not hearsay (unless an exception applies) Use: Clarifies timelines, proves communication or intent 4. Real (Physical) Evidence Definition: Tangible items involved in the case Examples: Murder weapon, blood-stained clothes, stolen goods Rule: Must be relevant and properly handled/documented Use: Visually persuasive; supports or challenges witness accounts 5. Hearsay Evidence Definition: Statement made outside court, offered for its truth Examples: “He told me he saw it happen”; affidavits from non-testifying witnesses Rule: Generally inadmissible unless an exception applies (e.g., dying declaration) Use: Often excluded or challenged; used strategically when exceptions apply 6. Demonstrative Evidence Definition: Illustrates or explains other evidence Examples: Diagrams, models, accident reconstructions Rule: Must be accurate, fair, and not overly prejudicial Use: Simplifies complex information; enhances testimony clarity 7. Opinion Evidence Definition: Expert or lay opinion to aid understanding Examples: Forensic scientist’s DNA analysis, medical expert on injuries Rule: Experts must be qualified; testimony must meet reliability standards Use: Influences the court on technical or scientific matters #LawStudent #LegalEducation #LawNotes #TypesOfEvidence #IndianEvidenceAct #advocate #lawyers #lawyer #CourtroomPractice #LegalProfession #JudiciaryPreparation #law #news #LawOnLinkedIn

One of the worst feelings working on contracts is when you knowingly sign a terrible contract. You may have no leverage and be stuck with the counterparty's standard terms. You may be doing a deal with a counterparty only willing to move forward on one-sided terms. Of course, you can always choose to walk away and not sign. That's what most lawyers will advise because doing no deal is often better than doing a bad deal. But sometimes companies make a risk decision that doing no deal in this case is a worse outcome than signing a bad deal. While you may be stuck without typical contractual protections and options, there may be things you can do before and after you sign the contract to protect the company. 1. Try to shorten the term of the agreement – Signing unfavorable contracts is risky, but it becomes much riskier when you are locked in for a longer term. Try to reduce the term to your minimum viable length that still makes it worthwhile to preserve other options if things turn out as you fear. 2. Shift what you can to the statement of work or order form – Moving concepts to the statement of work (SOW) or order form may make it easier to make changes during the term. Most companies have less review and scrutiny over those changes. Your relationship lead at the counterparty may be able to make adjustments that you wouldn’t get through as a formal amendment. 3. Reduce the purchase scope even if it leads to a higher price – See if you can reduce the minimum purchase quantity or feature set, even if it means paying more per unit or hour. Think of that additional per-unit fee as a risk premium. It may give you options to reduce the amount of damage or loss you face from the deal if things go sideways. 4. If payment terms are the problem, talk to Finance about the best strategy – If the payment terms are onerous or have severe consequences for any delay, have a conversation with your Finance team. You may be able to reduce that risk with prepayment or extra monitoring to ensure no problems occur. 5. If you are stuck with low liability limits, look into additional insurance or resources – If you are facing low liability limits, explore operational strategies to reduce the risks. These include getting additional insurance, adding more technology to monitor and track, or hiring more people to oversee the work. These things make it easier to stop little problems from becoming big ones. 6. If it is just a bad deal overall, start evaluating other vendors and solutions – Work in parallel to identify alternative paths that might meet your needs. That diligence may clarify available options or your lack of them. You should also consider how to expand your options through operational changes or hiring for specific skillsets. Don’t wait for trouble to happen. Do what you can to reduce your vulnerability before and after entering into a terrible deal. What other advice would you add for dealing with terrible contracts? #Contracts

Law school taught me the law. It didn’t teach me how to survive my first client call. Or how to send a clear email under pressure. Or how to admit I needed help without sounding lost. These are things I had to learn on the job. Sometimes the hard way. Here are 10 lessons I use almost every day. None of them showed up in a syllabus. 1. Saying “I don’t know” isn’t weakness. It’s professionalism Early on, I thought I had to pretend to know everything. Now I know what clients want is someone who knows what to check, not someone guessing under pressure. 2. A sloppy email can undo your good work Formatting, tone, and the right cc all matter. No one told me email would be part of my legal reputation. 3. Coffee chats are short. But they’re real interviews You’re being remembered even in small moments. That means preparation, curiosity, and thoughtful follow-up. 4. Plain English wins every time If your client, judge, or colleague doesn’t understand you, your brilliance means nothing. Clarity beats complexity. 5. Clients want more than answers. They want confidence Even if you’re still working through the issue, the way you explain your process shapes how much they trust you. 6. Time-blocking protects your brain When everything is urgent, nothing gets done. I’ve learned to treat calendar space like legal real estate. It’s valuable and limited. 7. “What’s on your plate?” needs a real answer Post-its and memory don’t cut it. I use systems now. Even a simple tracker helps, because losing track costs more than a few minutes. 8. You don’t need to be loud to be respected Some of the most impactful lawyers I’ve met speak softly and carry a binder. Preparation and presence are louder than volume. 9. Early feedback prevents late regret Whether it’s a senior lawyer, professor, or friend, a five-minute check-in beats hours of rework. 10. Kindness isn’t extra. It’s strategic The admin assistant, the court clerk, the junior on your file. They all remember how you treated them. This profession is built on trust, not just talent. Law school gave me the foundation. These gave me traction. I’m still learning. But I wish someone had shown me this list earlier. What would you add to the list? Tag someone who taught you a lesson law school didn’t.

Most AI contracts assume there are only two ways things can go wrong. Misuse or malfunction. That assumption breaks the moment you deploy an autonomous agent. Agents do not only generate content. They interpret goals, choose execution paths, and trigger actions across systems. When something goes wrong, the failure often does not fit either of the traditional buckets. In practice, there are three. Misuse. The customer violates defined constraints. The agent is deployed in an environment it was not designed for, guardrails are modified, or the system is used for a prohibited purpose. Malfunction. The system fails technically. A bug, a defect, or behavior clearly outside documented capabilities. Autonomous conduct. The agent operates within its parameters, interprets the objective, and produces an unintended outcome. This third category is where most contracts are thin. Templates collapse it into misuse or malfunction because those are the only risk boxes they recognize. But autonomous conduct is neither. The system followed the rules. The outcome still created exposure. If you are reviewing AI agent provisions, three practical checks surface the risk quickly. First, does the agreement distinguish misuse, malfunction, and autonomous conduct, or treat everything as breach? Second, does it define what happens operationally when an agent crosses a boundary: notification timeline, suspension trigger, root cause analysis, corrective safeguards? Third, does it separate reviewed outputs from autonomous actions that were never approved before execution? These are not drafting nuances. They shape how incidents are handled in the real world. When systems act, failure analysis becomes part of contract architecture, not an afterthought. I’ll be going deeper on this in an upcoming discussion on how contracts are evolving into governance systems, including how these failure modes show up in real agreements: https://lnkd.in/gKY4Aw7H — Olga V. Mack I build legal systems for real life.

Most people fight objections. I turn them into leverage. Here’s what I’ve learned: Objections 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭 like attacks. You feel the heat rise. You want to push back. But when you fight them, you lose control. I learned this the hard way on the streets of Glasgow. Where words were weapons, and reading people was survival. Now, I train professionals how to keep their cool, even when the boardroom feels like a pressure cooker. I’ve trained thousands of people in high-pressure roles. Here’s what works: 𝟭. 𝗦𝗲𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺. → Don’t take it personally → See the human behind the heat. Most people aren’t trying to provoke, they’re trying to protect something. 𝟮. 𝗙𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. → Ask: “𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘶𝘴𝘩𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬?” → Look for the 𝘸𝘩𝘺, not just the 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 → Get curious, not defensive 𝟯. 𝗥𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗼𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻. → Ask: “𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘢 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘴?” → Explore. Don’t defend. Create space for joint problem-solving. 𝟰. 𝗥𝗲-𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀. → When emotions spike, reach for facts. → Use criteria both sides recognise. Timing, risk, fairness, precedent. → Neutral ground restores calm. 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗺𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 — 𝗶𝘁’𝘀 𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗴𝘂𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲. Use lines like: → “𝘏𝘦𝘭𝘱 𝘮𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦.” → “𝘓𝘦𝘵’𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘩 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥.” Because every time you do this, objections lose their sting. They stop being threats and start becoming tools. This works in contract disputes, boardroom deals, cross-functional stand-offs, anywhere pressure runs high. Objections become clarity. Clarity becomes leverage. And you stay in control. Objections aren’t the enemy. They’re a map if you know how to read them.