Deep Dive: Staying in the Room

Olivia Carter

Let’s talk about something we occasionally see in higher ed leadership. Every now and then, a highly visible executive—someone with a strong public profile, often seen as a thought leader—steps away from their role, or sees it come to an unexpected end. It doesn’t happen often, but when it does, it raises important questions.

Mark Putnam

Exactly. These are leaders who’ve earned respect in national circles. They’re speaking at conferences, publishing ideas, shaping conversations. But sometimes, despite all that visibility, their tenure ends suddenly. And from the outside, it can be hard to understand why.

Olivia Carter

And to be clear—this isn’t about failure or assigning blame. I’ve learned a lot from leaders like that. But in some cases, what becomes clear in hindsight is this: proximity to institutional authority can sometimes accelerate decisions in ways that unintentionally short-circuit the deeper, slower work of building trust across the organization.

Mark Putnam

That’s so true. In higher education especially, where governance is shared and cultures run deep, trust can’t be rushed. And even when a leader is moving with the best of intentions, if people feel sidelined, that disconnect can grow over time.

Olivia Carter

Most of the time, these leaders do care deeply. They’re trying to move the institution forward. But even so, authority without influence rarely lasts. And influence—that quiet, patient kind of leadership—is what makes authority sustainable in the long run.

Mark Putnam

So what we’re really saying here is that how you lead in negotiation—how you use power, how you invite others in—says a lot about who you are as a leader.

Olivia Carter

Absolutely. Because in the end, people don’t just remember what you accomplished. They remember how you made decisions, how you brought people along, and whether you could be trusted to do it again.

Mark Putnam

I couldn't agree more. Leadership through influence and trust is the most important skillset CIOs can develop.

Olivia Carter

Right, building trust clearly hinges on how leaders navigate negotiation. But are we just talking about high-profile, flashy vendor contracts here? Or is this a skill CIOs are using constantly, like, behind the scenes?

Mark Putnam

It’s far more pervasive than most people think, Olivia. Sure, the vendor contracts get the headlines, but really, it’s an everyday part of the job. Aligning priorities across governance structures, navigating the timing of initiatives, ensuring budgets don’t derail strategy—it’s all negotiation. Those small, daily moves actually shape institutional outcomes just as much as the big deals do.

Olivia Carter

So, it’s not just saying, “Hey, this is our information technology road map, now let’s go”? There’s gotta be constant conversation, constant adjustment—like steering a ship?

Mark Putnam

That's right. And how you engage in those conversations—your style and your approach—sends a message. Not just about the immediate ask, but about your overall leadership. Are you cooperative? Are you transparent? Are you someone they’ll want to work with again when the stakes are even higher? Negotiation isn’t just about the content—it’s about the context.

Olivia Carter

Okay, but hold on—if it’s all about trust and buy-in, that makes sense for internal teams. But doesn’t that take forever? Like, wouldn’t some leaders argue that being decisive is better in the long run?

Mark Putnam

It can feel slower, yes, but trust accelerates everything else. When people know they can count on your integrity and your follow-through, you’ll find future negotiations go much faster. Think of trust as the compound interest of leadership. It’s slow to build but pays off exponentially over time.

Olivia Carter

I love that—trust as compound interest. So, you’re saying every negotiation, even the small ones, is a chance to either build or spend that trust capital?

Mark Putnam

Exactly. And leaders who don’t understand that usually end up burning through it faster than they can replace it. Their decisions may get short-term results, but the long-term costs—fractured relationships, a loss of credibility—those add up.

Olivia Carter

And that leads us to the heart of it, right? Trust isn’t just a feeling; it’s the currency that keeps the entire institution moving forward.

Mark Putnam

That's right, Olivia.

Olivia Carter

So, we’ve talked about trust as the cornerstone of negotiation, but what about the flipside—the strategies that push boundaries? Let’s dive into this idea of "extreme anchoring." It sounds bold, but also, like, risky. Can you break it down for us? What are we talking about here?

Mark Putnam

Sure. Extreme anchoring is when someone opens negotiations with a position that’s bold, maybe even unreasonable. The idea is to shift the frame of the conversation, redefine what's on the table. Think of it like expanding the Overton Window—it pushes everything else toward your terms.

Olivia Carter

So, it’s kinda like saying, “This is what I want, and everything else has to work around that,” right? Does that actually work?

Mark Putnam

It can—if the context is right. You’d use it in transactional negotiations, with clear boundaries or short-term goals. For instance, resetting expectations when something’s way off the mark. But in environments like higher education, it can backfire.

Olivia Carter

Why? Is it just because universities operate differently, like, more people to consider?

Mark Putnam

That’s part of it, yes. Higher education relies on long-standing relationships and collaborative efforts. Extreme positions can fracture trust, weaken coalitions, and leave lasting damage. You might win the immediate negotiation, but you risk losing credibility—and in institutions like these, credibility is everything.

Olivia Carter

Mm, so it’s not just about getting what you want in the moment. It’s, like, what happens after that. Those fractures you leave behind don’t just disappear.

Mark Putnam

Exactly. Once someone feels pushed into a corner, it’s hard to rebuild that relationship. This isn’t the corporate world where some outcomes might be finite. In academia, the ripple effects linger. Leaders need others to trust them—not just today, but for the next challenge, the next initiative, the next crisis.

Olivia Carter

So, it’s short-term wins versus long-term... what—leadership stability?

Mark Putnam

Stability, influence, and trust. That’s the bottom line. Extreme anchoring could win the moment, but if you alienate people, you’ve lost the room—and eventually, you lose your ability to lead effectively.

Olivia Carter

So, if extreme anchoring can erode trust and long-term influence, what’s a better approach for leaders who want to stay effective without burning bridges?

Mark Putnam

Well, there are three strategies I’d strongly recommend. These aren't just alternatives to extreme anchoring—they’re approaches that build influence while fostering trust. The first? Thoughtful trading of concessions.

Olivia Carter

Trading concessions... how does that work? You mean, like, giving something up intentionally?

Mark Putnam

Right. But it’s about phrasing those concessions as trades. For example, instead of just saying, "Sure, we’ll do what you’re asking," you’d say, "We can move up the timeline if we reduce the project scope." It reframes the negotiation as problem-solving, where both sides feel like they’re gaining something.

Olivia Carter

So, it’s not about giving in—it’s still collaborative but with clear boundaries.

Mark Putnam

Exactly. And it shifts the conversation from positions to priorities, which builds respect and trust over time. The second move is shaping the agenda early.

Olivia Carter

Hold on—shaping the agenda? You mean, like, controlling the discussion before it even starts?

Mark Putnam

That’s part of it. By stepping in beforehand, you set the terms, define the shared goals, and establish the framework for what’s even up for negotiation. It’s a quiet but powerful way to guide outcomes without needing to be confrontational.

Olivia Carter

Oh, that’s sneaky-smart. Instead of reacting to someone else’s demands, you’re... kind of steering the whole process without them even realizing it.

Mark Putnam

That's right. And that subtle influence can be far more effective than extreme anchoring, especially in environments where consensus is critical. Now, the third move—and this one feels counterintuitive to some—is leading with transparency.

Olivia Carter

Wait, what? Transparency? Isn’t negotiation usually about, I don’t know, playing your cards close to your chest?

Mark Putnam

That’s the traditional view, sure. But think about this—if you start with a fair and honest position, especially when others are expecting posturing, it can completely disarm the situation. You catch people off guard in the best way, and it builds trust right out of the gate.

Olivia Carter

Huh. So, instead of playing games, you’re—what—just setting the tone from the start?

Mark Putnam

That's right. It’s about signaling integrity while also making it clear that you value collaboration over confrontation. When people see that you’re being upfront, it encourages them to respond in kind. And that honesty? It’s not weakness—it’s a long-term advantage.

Olivia Carter

Okay, I see what you mean. These moves are definitely not “soft” skills. They’re strategic, scalable, and honestly, probably more effective than anchoring ever could be.

Mark Putnam

Absolutely. They not only get results but also strengthen relationships, ensuring that when the next negotiation comes around, you’re already working from a foundation of trust and mutual respect.

Olivia Carter

Speaking of strategies that build trust and long-term influence, it makes me wonder—why do names like Karrass and Voss still carry so much weight in leadership circles? With everything moving towards speed and disruption, aren’t their ideas getting a bit outdated?

Mark Putnam

That’s an interesting point, Olivia. But the reason they’re still relevant? Simplicity. They strip negotiation down to essential truths. Like Karrass once said, “You don’t close deals—you build them.” It’s timeless because it’s human.

Olivia Carter

You build them. Not win them. Hm, that’s a hard shift for leaders who were taught to, you know, win at all costs. But it makes sense, especially thinking about, like, higher ed institutions. No one’s walking away after the deal. You’re stuck with each other.

Mark Putnam

That's right. That’s why the best negotiators focus on empathy as a tool—not as a soft skill, but as strategic data, as Chris Voss puts it. They use empathy to understand what others value, what they fear. It’s not about being nice; it’s about being effective. And clarity? Restraint? Even curiosity? Those traits are what win over the long haul.

Olivia Carter

Okay, I love that. Empathy isn’t weakness; it’s data. That’s definitely a mindset shift. But let me ask this—how do leaders actually practice that, day to day? Like, what’s the one thing they should focus on?

Mark Putnam

They should focus on trust. Every negotiation, whether it’s big or small, is your advertising campaign for trust. Your actions in that room ripple far beyond the immediate deal. Ask yourself: Are you negotiating to prove a point—or preserve trust? Would this move earn credibility—or cost it?

Olivia Carter

Those are powerful questions. And I have to say, Mark, this feels like the mic-drop moment.

Mark Putnam

Maybe so. Here’s the thing—credibility is like compound interest. It grows slowly but pays huge dividends over time. If you plan to stay, negotiate—and lead—like someone who’s earned their place. That’s leadership with staying power.

Olivia Carter

And on that note, I think we’ve arrived. This might be one of my favorite deep dives yet, Mark. Thanks for all your insights—and seriously, thanks for reminding us that negotiation isn’t just about deals; it’s about who we’re becoming as leaders.

Mark Putnam

Always a pleasure to dig into these topics with you, Olivia. And, to everyone listening, thank you for being part of the conversation. We hope it leaves you thinking about your own leadership journey.

Olivia Carter

Until next time, stay curious, stay thoughtful, and stay in the room. Bye for now!