The eNewsletter for Savvy Nutrition Professionals

To get your own FREE subscription click here


Submit CPE Reporting Form

List of All Courses
Quick way to order!

Nutrition &

Professional Development



Bargain Corner

Frequently Asked Questions

Become One
of Our Authors

The New CPE
Process Made
Portfolio (PDP)

To Contact Us


Vol. 5 No. 10, October 2013 Copyright 2013 by Wolf J. Rinke

Feel free to forward this eNewsletter to other Nutrition Professionals.
To get your own FREE subscription click above.


"Skill at inventing options is one of the most useful assets a negotiator can have."
--Roger Fisher and William Ury

Fat Chance: Beating the Odds Against Sugar, Processed Food, Obesity, and Disease.
Book by Robert H. Lustig, M.D, Study Guide by Luis A. Rodriguez, RD, CNSC
C245, 28 CPEUs, $169.95. (Book, 320 pgs and study guide, 38 pgs)
Ground breaking book documents the science and politics that have led to the pandemic of obesity and disease, and proves that "a calorie is not a calorie." Tells you how to readjust your patient's key hormones to regulate their hunger, reward and stress, so that they can lose weight permanently and recover their health. For more information and customer comments, click here.
Approved by CDR, CBDM, NCBDE
For RDs & DTRs: Suggested Learning Need Codes for the Prof. Dev. Portfolio:
2000, 2020, 2050, 2070, 2090, 2100, 2110, 3000, 3005, 3010, 3020, 3030, 3040, 3060, 3070, 3080, 3090, 3100, 4000, 4010, 4020, 4030, 4040, 4050, 4060, 4070, 4080, 4090, 4100, 4110, 4120, 4150, 4160, 5000, 5130, 5150, 5160, 5180, 5190, 5200, 5240, 5260, 5280, 5290, 5300, 5320, 5350, 5370, 5460, 6010, 8018, 9020.
Reminder: Meet your 5 year ethics requirement with our FREE Ethics CPE program, C237E, 2 CPEUs. Developed in collaboration with CDR. Free with purchase of any CPE Program, available in electronic format only! For more information and customer comments, click here.

Contrary to What We Tell Patients Skipping Breakfast May Help With Weight Loss
Recent studies at Cornell appear to demonstrate that even though study participants who skipped breakfast ate more at lunch, ended up with a net caloric deficit of 408kcal by the end of the day. Researchers concluded: "These data are consistent with published literature demonstrating that skipping a meal does not result in accurate energy compensation at subsequent meals and suggests that skipping breakfast may be an effective means to reduce daily energy intake in some adults."
ACTION STEP: Help your patients become more knowledgeable about effective weight loss strategies. When you enter the keyword "weight loss" in the search field at you will find nine different CPE programs, including the new "Fat Chance," C245, approved for 28 CPEUs. (For details go to

Source: D.A. Levitsky and C.R. Pacanowski, Effect of skipping breakfast on subsequent energy intake, Physiol Behav. 2013 Jul 2;119:9-16. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2013.05.006. Epub 2013 May 11,, accessed 9/16/13.  Source: D. E. Barnes, et al., The Mental Activity and eXercise (MAX) Trial: A Randomized Controlled Trial to Enhance Cognitive Function in Older Adults, JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(9):797-804. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.189,, accessed 8/19/13.


Click here to save up to 16% on all of our easy to use, high quality CPE products and use the coupon on the "home page."
Hurry-coupon expire 12/15/13.
Be sure to check the Bargain page for reduced courses. 
Now you can save even more by ordering e-courses.

Meet your ethics requirement with our FREE Ethics eCourse, C237E, 2CPEUs, available in electronic/PDF format only!!! Developed in collaboration with CDR. Free with online purchase of any other CPE Course. Course must be added to shopping cart. Applies to new orders only. For more information and customer comments, click here.

BTW--you can search CPEs by learning codes at our website. Just go to, type in the learning code you are looking for and the search engine will list all the courses that apply. It's another way to make your life easier.

by Wolf J. Rinke, PhD, RDN, CSP
In Part 1 of this article you learned why it's important to:
--Manage Your Perceptions
--Be Willing To Walk Away
--Know Your BATNA, WAP and ROSA
Now let's find out why it is vital for you to:

Negotiate Over Interests, Not Positions
Let's look at a father-daughter encounter.
Father: "Drink your milk." (That's his position).
Daughter: "I don't like milk." (That's her position).
Of course, from here on it all goes downhill. So if the father is a Tough Battler he might say: "I'm your father and you will listen to me," or "I'm smarter than you," or "I'm wiser than you" ad nauseam; "Now, dam it drink your milk, or you will be grounded!" (Win-lose.)
If the daughter is a Tough Battler, it might go something like this: "I hate milk. If you make me drink it I will throw up."
Even though on the surface it might appear that the father has all the power, it's likely that in this case the daughter will win, after all you probably are not particularly keen to clean up her throw-up (win-lose).
Of course, you could compromise with your daughter. "I tell you what, just drink half of your milk, and I'll forget you are being so nasty to your old dad." (Lose-lose.)
If all else fails, you might bribe her: "If you drink your milk, I will take you to the movies." (Of course, that is reinforcing various undesired outcomes, such as: "If I rebel, good stuff happens. So next time I can't get what I want, I'll just rebel.")
Putting those unanticipated outcomes aside, all of these approaches will likely end up in either win-lose or lose-lose outcomes which neither you nor your daughter are going to be particularly happy with.
Now let's take a look at how this might work if we focus on interests, needs or wants instead of positions.
Father: "I understand you don't like milk. So please tell me what you really want."
Daughter: "I want food that tastes good and milk just doesn't taste good to me."
Father: "I appreciate that. Now let me share with you what I want. I would like you to get food that is nutritious and high in calcium. Why don't we take a moment and come up with a list of foods that meet both of our needs." (That's separating option generation from decision making. See the next section). At this point the two of you will probably be able to come up with a long list of foods that meet both of your objectives--food that tastes good, is nutritious and high in calcium--such as cheese, ice cream, yogurt, pizza and the list goes on.
In the previous example we saw how the parties' egos became identified with their position. Once that happens you have a new interest to satisfy--such as saving face--which has nothing to do with your original interests. As you discovered, the longer you attempt to reconcile positions the less attention you will devote to addressing the real concerns, needs, or wants of both parties. The result, it takes longer, is likely to raise people's negative emotions such as anger, and is less likely to generate a win-win outcome. Plus it will likely damage the relationship between the bargaining parties. All of that is magnified if you are dealing with a Tough Battler who starts off with an extreme opening position.

Separate Option Generation from Decision Making
As you learned from the previous example most of us tend to focus on two mutually exclusive outcomes--either you or I will get what we want. If instead we learn how to get in the habit of engaging the brain power of both parties, many not-so-obvious ideas can be generated that will meet or exceed both parties' needs. In other words, if we separate option generation from decision making we can almost always make the pie bigger, and if we can't, then we can establish objective criteria before attempting to reach an agreement (see the next section). Unfortunately we tend to fall into the trap of skipping the option generation step because most of us want to get the negotiation process over with, and one way to do that is to come up with the answer both of us can agree on as fast as possible.
At this point you might be saying: "That just doesn't make any sense." Let me explain: if you go back to the used car selling example we talked about in the previous issue of this eNewsletter, both parties were concerned with was price. Is it really? It's very likely that both parties had other things that factored into the sale. For example, if the buyer had said to the seller: "Before we talk about price, tell me what you want out of this deal?" The seller might have said: "I'm interested to sell the car now but keep it for another two weeks because my daughters' new car won't be delivered until then." She might also have said: "I would like to get cash so I don't have to worry about a bounced check." Or she might have said: "I love this car like my own child and I would really like to sell it to someone who will take really great care of it."
The buyer on the other hand might have said: "I would like to make sure I'm not buying a lemon; I would like a car that has been well taken care of; I would like to drive it away today; I would like to deal with someone I can trust"…and the list goes on. All of these may have economic value to the seller and/or the buyer and hence could have been used to not only influence the purchase price of the car, but could have resulted in both parties getting far more than just a good price--i.e. getting a win-win outcome.

If All Else Fails Resort To Objective Criteria
You will of course encounter real fixed "pie" scenarios. For example, if you have only one vacancy in your department and there are three people applying, even after all the best negotiations in the world there will still be two losers and only one winner. To improve negotiation whenever you are involved in a true distributive negotiation process, where one party must lose and the other win, it is wise to resort to objective criteria such as standards, rules, independent mediators, arbitration, flipping a coin, drawing straws or other forms of chance, or any other criteria that produces a perceived fair outcome. The classical example of this is the challenge of dividing one piece of cake between two siblings. If you have children I'm sure you can identify with this dilemma and may remember how much potential bickering can ensue. There is of course a very elegant solution to that problem, which dates back to biblical times--have one child cut the cake and the other choose the piece she wants.
In the case of hiring a new employee, perceived fairness is enhanced if you make the selection criteria and the selection process public.
There are other situations where it may be beneficial for both parties to resort to objective criteria. Let's say for example, your best friend is interested in purchasing your car. In this case, both of you express a desire to get a fair price and not engage in haggling because your relationship is more important than getting the best possible price. As a result, you both agree not to negotiate the price at all, and instead abide by the "Blue Book" value.
According to Fisher and Ury, authors of "Getting to Yes. Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In," there are three basic strategies that will make resorting to objective criteria work:
1. Frame the proposal as a joint search for objective criteria.
In the case of selling your car to your best friend, you both decided the "Blue Book" value would represent a "fair" price for the car.
2. Reason and be receptive to the other person's reason as to which standard is most applicable and should be used to arrive at a "fair" outcome.
If you are selling your house you may propose to use an average sales price of three similar houses that have sold in your neighborhood during the past year as the "fair" price. The buyer however prefers an average of three independent appraisals as a fair price. In this case, it is important to be receptive not only to the proposal but also the underlying reason for the proposal.
3. Don't yield to pressure, yield to principles.
Pressure may come in a variety of forms: bribes, side payments, threats or a refusal to budge. If the other side uses these types of pressures, ask him to tell you his reasoning behind his proposal, suggest legitimate objective criteria and state why they represent a fair outcome to both of you.
If the other party is unable to produce that evidence, stick to your guns, and if that fails you still have the option to Walk Away.

Source: W. J. Rinke, "Win-Win Negotiation: Fail-Safe Strategies to Help You Get More of What You Want," 20 CPEUs,

Recommend me to the meeting planner of your upcoming state or local dietetic association and I will help make your next meeting a "howling success." Plus I will make you into a hero. As a way of giving back, I speak to ADA groups at significantly reduced rates.

After fishing all day and not even getting a nibble a discouraged fisherman stopped by the fish store on his way home. "Throw me six of the biggest whole fresh fish you have in the store," said the fisherman to the clerk behind the counter.
"Why do you want me to throw them?" asked the clerk.
"Because I'm going to 'catch' them," answered the frustrated fisherman. "I may be a lousy fisherman, but I'm not a liar."

Dr. Wolf J. Rinke, RDN, CSP is the president of Wolf Rinke Associates--an accredited provider of easy to use CPE self-study programs for nutrition professionals since 1990 available at He is also a highly effective management consultant and executive coach who specializes in building peak performance organizations, teams and individuals, and an author of numerous CPE home study courses, audio/video programs as well as several best selling management, leadership and self-development books including Make it a Winning Life--Success Strategies for Life, Love and Business. In addition he is an internationally recognized keynote speaker and seminar leader who delivers customized presentations that combine story telling, humor and motivation with specific "how to" action strategies that participants can apply immediately to improve their personal and professional lives. Preview a demo at or call 800-828-9653.
If you have questions, or would like him to address a specific issue or topic in this eNewsletter please e-mail him at

We will not make your name or e-mail address available to anyone. Period! If this was forwarded to you and you would like to receive your own FREE subscription click here.