What Kind of Negotiator Are You, Really?

You can walk into a negotiation thinking you only need a number, a percentage, a quick yes. Then it turns into a psychological chess match where “standard terms” and sudden urgency start rewriting the value of what you built. We step back and treat negotiation the way innovators and creators need to treat it: as a moment where strategy, judgment, and intellectual property protection collide.

We share a simple framework from Protection for the Inventive Mind that turns messy deal conversations into something you can actually navigate. We explain the five negotiation hats and when to wear each one: Chef Hat preparation so you know your floor and non-negotiables before anyone tests them, Top Hat positioning so your invention, brand, design, or know-how lands as commercial impact, Winter Hat flexibility so you can restructure terms without collapsing, Beach Hat communication so the tone stays productive, and Police Hat defense so you can slow down, question vagueness, and catch hidden risk in “boilerplate” contract language.

Then we get personal and practical: what happens when pressure enters the room. We walk through five negotiation styles competitive, collaborative, accommodating, avoiding, and analytical and show how each can win the moment or lose the deal if you rely on it blindly. The goal is not a new personality. It’s a better ability to choose your approach in licensing negotiations, partnership talks, investor conversations, and IP agreements.

If this helps you, subscribe, share it with someone heading into a deal, and leave a review so more creators can negotiate with clarity and protect what they’ve built.

Send us Fan Mail

Check out "Protection for the Inventive Mind" – available now on Amazon in print and Kindle formats.

The views and opinions expressed (by the host and guest(s)) in this podcast are strictly their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the entities with which they may be affiliated. This podcast should in no way be construed as promoting or criticizing any particular government policy, institutional position, private interest or commercial entity. Any content provided is for informational and educational purposes only.