COMM 421 EXAM 3

Men's strengths

-Men tend to be good at spatial tasks (reading maps) -men need the intention stated explicitly -Women and men are= when individual maximize their outcomes without regard for others performance -Men do outperform women in competitive environments--not that the pressure makes women stumble, it's just that in competition men tend to become more energized -Men and testosterone → spikes during competition -more focused on winning, rather than equal outcomes

What is the problem with mixing the 4 levels of competence up?

-People have blind spots → most of us don't know how others are perceiving us, most of us think of ourselves being good communicators/friendly/energetic -People cannot see the difference between stage 1 and stage 4 --> Because they're both unconscious people think that what they do when it comes to communication and conflict in specific is competent when in fact it is incompetent -Most people aren't strategic about how they should approach their communication in conflict, they're just doing what they've always done. --> people typically feel as if they are doing better than they really are EX: Bolkan asking salespeople to rate how friendly/enthusiastic they thought they came off when they were selling stuff → they were rating themselves 9/10 → then he asked to record them, and when they saw themselves on video selling products they realized they didn't appear friendly at all People do what they have done in the past

women's strengths

-Women are better at demonstrating empathy - encoding/decoding nonverbal communication -Women understand the intention//men need it stated explicitly -remembering details of interpersonal interactions -Women understand the intention -Women and men are= when individual maximize their outcomes without regard for others performance -Women negotiators may be particularly energized when they felt a sense of responsibility to represent another person's interests (when we negotiate as a rep for someone else, we feel empowered and embolden) (the momma bear phenomenon) -focused on fair outcomes// relationship

What information is best sent through which mediums?

-face-to-face is good for helping people converge on meaning. -Mediated communication, on the other hand is good for conveying data (with written data, visual data, etc.). -Differences in communication channels are largely a function of richness and synchronicity. But, different channels of communicating are not any better or worse (inherently). They just have their own weaknesses and drawbacks.

Give examples of destructive (4 horsemen) and constructive conflict tactics

1. Criticism When you make a complaint about a person(who they are) instead of a behavior "You're lazy" 2. Contempt Showing disgust for others/sarcasm/when you communicate the other person is stupid Makes people feel terrible about themselves 3. Defensiveness When you refuse to accept responsibility 4. Stonewalling

What are the benefits of mediated communication? (4)

1. Able to rehearse the message - rephrase or fine-tune the message. 2. Reduces negative emotional transmission because people can be more deliberate in theirmessages instead of reacting out of anger or frustration. 3. Can send complex information in multiple manners (pictures, tables, figures). Of course, you can also do this in face-to-face communication if you bring visuals or handouts. 4. Can reprocess information at a later date. E.g., you can revisit an email to review the terms of an agreement.

What is the definition of conflict? How does this relate to conflict resolution? (5)

1. An expressed struggle -if you want a conflict to be fixed you have to bring it up, that's the only way to give people the opportunity to fix a situation. Ppl cant read your mind, you have to define and express whats wrong so your counterpart can fix the problem creating a harmonious relationship 2. Interdependent parties -Conflict should only really occur with people who really influence our lives/ people whom we depend on. Don't have a conflict with people you don't depend on. EX: Bolkan saying don't get mad at people on the freeway, don't depend on them, dont engage in conflict when the people you're in conflict with has no bearing in your life 3. Perceived incompatible goals - we think we want different things// we have different needs and desires. -perhaps but often times you have the same goal which is to work together to come up with something that leaves you both better off -EX: think about an argument youve had with your partner--> deep down you guys have the same goal. Think Bolkan and his GF wanting to go on dates on the beach (he hates it but she loves it) 4. Perceived scarce resources -Scarce commodities (think about the movie blood diamond) we fight over things that are scarce. think about toilet paper and the pandemic Think about the beginning of quarantine and fighting over water/toilet paper -Can be interpersonal feelings as well (power, self-esteem, how they are being treated) 5. Perceived interference -If you think that people really intended to do something you'll be mad -this can be enraging if you find out they're doing it on purpose (ex: stranger tripping you) -most of the time ppl arent doing things to upset you, typically theyre just going about their lives and they just happen to upset you.

What are the various goals in conflict? (4)

1. Content What is the change you want to see occur/ what do you actually want them to do 2. Process How you conduct the conflict How you choose to engage in the conflict (in private/in public) There can be conflict about the process itself ex: arguing in front of your parents with your partner 3. Relational Feeling as if they are being treated badly by the other ex: GF being mad thinking "I cant belive my own boyfriend would do this to me" 4. Identity People don't like feeling incompetent or having their character attacked EX: 'you're so lazy' 'you're stupid' -Be sensitive to your own goals- -remember to stay focused on your goal

Qualities of effective/ineffective negotiators

1. Effective -Strong -Dominant -Assertive -Rational 2. Ineffective -Weak → bolkan crossed this out bc his girlfriends have all been strong -Submissive -Accommodating -Emotional *notice that the qualities of the ineffective negotiators are the qualities associated with women// behaviors are rigged in favor of men

Why do impasses happen? How do you break them impasses?: (1)Incompatible frames--> _______ the negotiation

1. Incompatible frames: People sometimes have a hard time coming to an agreement because they see the interaction from opposing positions - instead of from commonalities ---EX: think about choosing where to go to vacation with your partner, they want to go to the desert but you hate the heat --> but they want to go for the sceneary/hikes. different perspectives can create tension but what you forget is that deep down you both want the same thing (to spend time together) 1. Reframe the negotiation: Talk in their terms. In other words, find a frame they already agree with and use that to structure your message. -EX:In the case of a boss who is reluctant to raise your salary you can talk about the importance of investing in employee satisfaction - if you know they already support that notion. (1a) Find a frame you can both agree upon: --In the case of going to the desert with your bg/gf you can remind yourself and your partner that your main goal is to have fun with each other - location doesn't matter, but being comfortable does (1b). Remind people that coming to an agreement is better than walking away (1c). talk about shared interests and how the two of you are better off working together instead of working apart.

What are the dirty tricks of negotiating (LIST THEM ONLY)

1. Intimidation 2. good cop bad cop 3. Deception 4. Left at the altar 5. Snow Job 6. Cloning 7. Cash King

How can the media be differentiated? (2)

1. Media richness = the amount of information you can transfer in a communication episode. -Most rich = Face-to-face because you have: words, nonverbal communication too. --Can process multiple cues simultaneously ---Facilitates rapid feedback ----Enables the creation of personal "presence" -That goes away with mediated communication. --Depending on your media of choice that will go away either to a large extent or to a small extent -In mediated contexts, you end up losing some nonverbal communication behavior and a certain level of depth in the conversation. --i. Even in video conferencing like Zoom (as you probably all know by now) 1. Lose immediate reactions 2. Can't see their full posture 3. Emotional tones are muted -This all matters because important affective (i.e., emotional) information is lost. -Emotions as social information theory suggests that emotions are important in communication because they tell us about the states that other people are experiencing. --This goes for negative emotions (e.g., anger, frustration, irritability). ---And for positive emotions too (joy, enthusiasm, interest). ----So, when we lose media richness, we lose this emotional information. 2. Media Synchronicity Communication is meant to both (1) convey information and to help people (2) converge on meaning (convergence refers to having the same interpretation of a situation). -When using mediated communication, it might be harder for people to understand where you are coming from... to help them see your side of the position. i. As media synchronicity would predict, mediated communication is often asynchronous which can make it more difficult to communicate convergence.

(Men and women in negotiation) Reasons for the differences (video and lecture material) (5)

1. Physiology (biggest influence) -men and women have different brain structures -Function of testosterone that you're exposed to before birth (video) -only 50% of the population has the same brain sex as their biological sex --15% of the pop is switched --35% has attributes of both 2. Socialization -How boys and girls are taught differently -Girls → emotional/ submissive -Boys → tough/competitive -Girls and boys are reinforced differently → (whether in school/friends/peers) leads to different forms of expression ex: 'boys dont cry' -people tend to be rewarded and punished based on the expectations that we have about others --Stereotypical behaviors of men: -Strong -Dominant -Assertive -Rational --Stereotypical behaviors of women -Weak → bolkan crossed this out bc his girlfriends -have all been strong -Submissive -Accommodating -Emotional (when women are strong and dominant she can be seen as behaving in a manner that is less positive) 3. Self-construals -women tend to put more importance on the relationship/people --tend to be 'keepers' of a relationship// will focus on the relational interests of both parties -men tend to be more independent-minded and focused on things --in arguments men tend to focus on right and wrong --look for a clear winner without worrying about feelings or relationships// competition 4. Expectations Matter bc when someone breaks our attention they capture our attention → we focus more on those behaviors // men can be more aggressive in a negotiation than a woman can, when women are aggressive we notice. bc of these differences reseacrhers mention that because of these stereotypes women can really only be --likable and ineffective --effective and socially unattractive 5. Experience -Men more likely to take a risk than a women -in an ambiguous situation when you don't know whether or not you should negotiate a man will be way more likely to try than a woman is --therefore they get subsequent experience

What are the steps you need to go through in order to tell someone "no"appropriately (3)

1. Stay calm, rely on what you learned, you'll get through it 2. Be strategic in your own behaviors, dont react based on emotions Be deliberate in your negotiation to reach the outcomes you desire 3. Stay positive It will be easy to get upset which can escalate the situation, you want to try and stay away from making the other person more hostile If you can't do this, consider taking a break (but tell the other person that you want to come back)

What are the results from studies that look at mediated communication in negotiation Scenarios? (4 total) 1.1. Study 1: "E-negotiation versus face-to-face negotiation what has changed - if anything?"

1. Study 1: "E-negotiation versus face-to-face negotiation what has changed - if anything?" a. Mediated negotiation took longer than did face-to-face communication. In written media - not spoken media. b. Mediated communication led to more hard bargaining tactics compared to cooperation Speculated that this occurred because of lower rapport and trust. c. No difference in negotiated outcomes (e.g., final price).

Any drawbacks for mediated communication? (3)

1. Takes more time. This time stems from... Production costs - takes longer to make a message. Delay costs - the time it takes for people to react to one another. 2. Less likely to promote a positive emotional tone, build relationships. This is mainly found in shorter contexts. In longer contexts the relational aspect of theinteraction can still exist (e.g., pen pals). Can promote positivity if you establish a relationship first (through a phone call, ormeeting, etc.) before you negotiate in your more heavily mediated format. 3. People can be/appear more aggressive because of the lack of positivity.

What are some ways we can enhance our negotiation skills in mediated contexts? (4)

1. Try to get agreements in writing (even in face-to-face negotiation). (1a) This means get an email or a written form that outlines the details of a deal. (1b) Verbal agreements are only as good as the people who make them. Do not rely on these, they fail. 2. Use visuals or written information to facilitate information transmission (even in face-to-face negotiations). (2a) Show people the aspects of your deal that they need to "see." (2b) Help organize your thoughts with a structured plan put on paper that you can share with others if you need to. -EX: think pie charts 3. If the other person appears manipulative or if you are nervous about the emotional aspects of negotiation - move things to a mediate context--> over the phone/zoom. 4. Compensate for reduced richness a. Play up the positivity in mediated contexts (this tends to be muted). Create a relationship before you negotiate online. Remember that your interpretation of their intentions is likely to be skewed toward the negative. Work hard to be responsive, bruh.

What are the 4 levels of competence?

1. Unconscious incompetence - people make mistakes about their communication but they are unaware of their errors. --When you're bad at something but don't even know it EX: Bolkan and Golfing-he thought he would be awesome at it, thought it was easy→ but sucked (if you think like this you're likely in this stage) Ppl can be bad at communicating and not know that they're bad at communicating Ex: Bolkan and how he does consulting for companies & when he asks them to rate their communication skills → they say they are great but in reality they are terrible communicators 2. Conscious incompetence - people recognize the problems they may be having with communication. --First step in getting help Know you're bad at something (at least you know you're bad cuz now you can seek help) Happens when you get feedback/information about the performance Ex: Bolkan and golfing, when he went to actually play he sucked (when you know you're bad you're able to admit it) 3. Conscious competence - people are able to modify their behaviors but their actions seem artificial and stilted. They must be deliberate in their interactions to effect their desired outcomes. --People can do something correctly, but have to think about it (really focus) to make sure they're doing a specific behavior Ex: Bolkan and golfing he has to coach himself as he does it When you're negotiating (think this class) we have to remind ourselves strategies (ex: 'remember to krunch' 'make sure to log roll' 4. Unconscious competence - people are so comfortable and effective with their communication skills that they can produce successful interactions without effort. ex: think Pro's

What can women do to overcome obstacles to negotiating? (4)

1. Women tend to seek out negotiation less when they are in ambiguous situations SOOO --> (1a) Do research so you can be informed on when you can and when you cannot negotiate. the more you're aware of your negotiating flexibility the more you're aware that this is actually an option you can choose to pursue--> the more you are to do it Ex: Study looking at MBA's → when men are offered to take first jobs they're more likely to negotiate it than women. Ex: Bolkan at his first job trying to figure out why he got paid more over the other teachers--> it wasn't sex/pedigree/experience/publications it was because when the dean called them they were the only ones who krunched the original negotiation--> as a result they got a higher salary -be aware when you can and can't negotiate 2. Women tend to negotiate better when they are responsible for others...SOO--> (2a) try to reframe the negotiation as being on behalf of others ex: bolkan and being a busboy--> why his coworker did better for him at the job (bolkan just needed extra cash/ his coworker needed to feed his child) --you can reframe a negotiation to think of creating more money for your family/others, this can help you move from feeling selfish to being altruistic 3. Women tend to have less experience SOO--> (3a) take classes like this one to get more experience/knowledge or seek out more negotiation opportunities 4. Women tend to be plagued by expectations (4a) sometimes you have to be an actor --> play up the feminine side by acting friendlier than perhaps a man has to be get get the same outcomes. bc men can get away with acting more stern or logical they can be less friendly. but bc women are judged more harshly based on expectations, you might have to act more friendly (smiling more) so you dont get dinged for behaving a manor that gets you the outcomes that you want -in job negotiations (women)remind them that--> that youre an employee not just a woman

What are the dirty tricks of negotiating and how do you defend against them?: 1. Intimidation -->

1. when someone tries to bully/intimidate you to do something EX: Bolkan and his example about going to 24 hour fitness for a guest pass (you had to talk to a sales rep beforehand to get the pass) Bolkan thought no problem and then when he met the sales rep the guy was huge and aggressive --> sales guy did the pitch and then told Bolkan that he would be dumb not to accept the sales pitch right then and there. when Bolkan told him that he wasn't interested and that he wanted to try out the machines the guy acted super angry and pissed off that Bolkan didn't want to purchase the contract right then and there. This guy was trying to bully Bolkan into buying a gym pass --🅷🅾🆆 🆃🅾 🅳🅴🅵🅴🅽🅳-- (1a) Relax, don't let the act scare you. Ultimately there is nothing they can do to you. you don't really have to work with these individuals you can walk away at any point (this is 2020 not the 1700's where they might challenge you to a dual) (1b) I stay strong and don't show weakness. what you shuold do is stay relaxed look them in the eye and say, "I came here to negotiate, not to fight" at this point you can have them explain to you why they think theyre correct, and then you can explain your position as well. It's like when homeless people want money from us and we are in the car Most people look away in intimidation I look right at them and smile (1c) If you get to the point where you don't like how people are treating you and you don't feel comfortable then consider asking for someone else - or go away and come back and talk to someone else. There are lots of people who can help you when you need it. If one person isn't working the way you want them to then consider taking a break and trying again with someone else. --> EX: Bolkan and his dad going to a car dealership and leaving to avoid a bad car salesman

What are the dirty tricks of negotiating and how do you defend against them?: 2. Good bop/bad cop-->

2. Good bop/bad cop Essentially the same thing as intimidation but with an "out" reflected in the good cop. -Research shows that the order of presentation of the cops here matters. in particular its important that you use the "bad" negotiator first to intimidate or to stall an agreement. And then the "good" negotiator comes through so they appear much more reasonable in contrast to the previous individual. -The second negotiator(good cop) tries to make it seem like they are on your team versus the other negotiator. They try to act like their hands are tied but they'll do their best to help you !!!Remember this: no one here is on your team!!! Not the first negotiator and not the second one either. The whole thing is a ruse to get you to work within their game plan --🅷🅾🆆 🆃🅾 🅳🅴🅵🅴🅽🅳-- (2a) Don't trust, ultimately your responsibility you need to look at the end result, not how you got there. In other words, ignore the first interaction (which seems better in contrast) and focus on the second one. (if its a good one on it own or if its only good in contrast to the first offer--> that's a diff story) ask yourself Is the final price good? If so, buy it? If not, don't. -But don't let a comparison between negotiators influence your perspective. ex: This is the same thing as seeing a jacket on sale from $500 to $400. Is it a good jacket at $400? If so, great... buy it. But, don't buy it simply because it is $100 off. That was likely the marketing plan all along. ALWAYS look at the final deal in isolation--> dont let the first interaction anchor you

Why do impasses happen? How do you break them impasses?: 2.Incompatible styles---> make ________

2. Incompatible styles: If both people have a dominating and distributive style of negotiation you will get nowhere because no one is willing to budge, both people are trying to win at the expense of the others --Without concessions, there is no negotiation. I have seen several students enter a negotiation exercise hell-bent on "winning" for themselves. These students often reach no deal impasses. -Most people would rather walk away from an unfair deal than let you claim the majority of value.//At least by walking away they can ensure that you both get the same thing - nothing. (2a)Make small concessions to get the negotiation rolling: Get people started on the idea that you will share concessions. This might mean that you are the person who has to start with a small concession and then you simply ask for one in return. what youre doing here is giving the first concession to get things started so both of yall can share concessions as you move forward (2b)Negotiate for them! --> sometimes the other side can have a hard time coming up with concessions that they want so why dont you come up with some that will work for you?--> ex: lets say that you want make 300 orders of a certain product and they are firm with only buying 200. you could say to them, does buying 300 sound good if we could drop the price by 5$, if that doesnt work ask 'would you buy 250 if we gave you a discount on shipping? the idea here is to find concessions that you would be happy with and make those as offers to them, if theyre unwilling to budge maybe you can come up with some concessions that can work for the both of you

Why do impasses happen? How do you break them impasses?: 3.Unrealistic expectations:---> acknowledge the other persons ______?

3. Unrealistic expectations: -If your envelope is not correlated with reality then it is unlikely that you will reach an agreement. -This can happen if you value your position too much, devalue their position too much,or if you are unrealistic about your alternatives. Of course, the same is true on their end. --when you expect too much you'll find that you're too quickly disappointed --> need realistic expectations (3a)Acknowledge the other person's concerns: People don't always want to be right, but they do want to be understood. Communicate that you see things from their perspective and understand why they feel or think the way they do. Then, help them also see things from your perspective --For example, there is nothing wrong with saying: "Yes this is worth $10, but I can only buy it for 5 because I am going to resell it and I have to make a profit."--> think of the show pawn stars, they use this technique quite often.

What are the dirty tricks of negotiating and how do you defend against them?: 3.Deception--->

3.Deception EX: from lecture notes-> I once went to sell my car because I wanted to get a new vehicle that would handle the snow when I moved to Pennsylvania. After negotiating for a while I had the price for a new car dialed in, all I had to do was trade in my car. Went to trade in a car worth 12k in a private market to the dealer. Based on my research, a trade-in was about 9k. I was okay with this price - saves me the hassle of selling it myself. Plus, I know they can't buy the car at the private price because theyhave to turn a profit. I went to a used car associate within the dealership and the guy told me that he could only accept $7k Baffled, I asked how he came to that number. He told me, it's right here from what I see on my screen. He said the number reflected the "blue book" value of the car. I knew that wasn't right so I jumped up to look at myself. Sure enough, it said $9k next to my car on the screen, not $7k. Homeboy was lying. Rascal. He knew the car was worth more but was making information up about why he couldn't accept the car in its condition for the price I wanted --🅷🅾🆆 🆃🅾 🅳🅴🅵🅴🅽🅳-- (3a) Deception is one area that needs to be called out. --> protect yourself!! -->Do research before you negotiate, people can only lie to you if you do not know the truth. (3b)Ask them how they made their decision - remember to insist on principled negotiation(make them show you evidence). Show them objective evidence of why they are wrong. If you can't show people why they are wrong, let them know you are taking a break to do research to confirm what they said later. when it comes to detecting deception, not just in negotation but in interpersonal communication as well, theres ways to see if someone is lying to you (dont always work but at least we can increase our odds of people telling us the truth)--> (3c)Ask direct questions -Indirect answers are often a sign of lying. -"Did you sleep with that other woman?" -"Why are you asking me?" (getting angry) "You have no right to question me." when the wife asks a direct question and the husband answers indirectly usually an indication of lying. (3d)Don't ask questions that are easy to confirm with a simple lie. -Is this pump in good shape? "Yes." -(to your kid) Did you go to the library after school? "Yes." INSTEAD--> ask questions that force a bigger lie. These are harder to concoct. "Explain the pump's condition?" "When will I need to replace the pump?" (to your kid)--> What did you do after school? by asking a bigger more direct question, youll be asking to recieve a bigger lie, bigger lies take more cognitive resources to create and often times youll find that people have a harder time coming up with these (3e)Create a contingency contract that negates their attempts at deception. --> think dennis rodman

What are the dirty tricks of negotiating and how do you defend against them?: 4. Left at the altar

4. Left at the altar At the last minute the other side says no and backs out of the deal, that theyve already agreed upon--> unless you can make a big concession. -Notice that this is not a nibble (see Negotiate to Win). -This is a big concession that they want from you at the last possible moment. They do this because they think: 1. You are committed 2. You abandoned your other alternatives so you are stuck --🅷🅾🆆 🆃🅾 🅳🅴🅵🅴🅽🅳-- (4a)Let them walk away, don't give in to a major demand at the last minute if you already had an agreement. That is bad-faith bargaining. If they don't contact you and you still want the deal, contact them after some time has passed. -Don't fall prey to scarcity (scared you'll lose the deal). Lots of people get scared that if they lose this deal then their lives are ruined. Bullsh*t. You just don't know there are alternatives out there or you don't realize that those alternatives could make you just as happy if not happier. -Don't fall into the trap of what I call "one-ism"... the idea that there is only one workable option for you. Feeling this way is going to make life very difficult for you.

What are the dirty tricks of negotiating and how do you defend against them?: 5. Snow job!

5. Snow job! person youre negotiating with brings in unnecessary information as a way to distract or confuse you. -->Providing tons of information that is (at best) tangential to your issues. --->The idea is to overwhelm your capacity to think through the best alternatives.-->Instead of having to think through the mountain of data, the other side hopes that you will allow them to guide you using their expertise. what theyre trying to say is that, "theres all this information, you must be confused but I know the answer so ill tell you what you should choose when it comes to a negotiation" --🅷🅾🆆 🆃🅾 🅳🅴🅵🅴🅽🅳-- (5a)Ask what information is necessary in order to make the deal.Ask them: "Why do I care?" "How does this affect me?" --Better yet, you need to do the research necessary to understand what is important to know and what is not. Do not rely on having to trust your negotiation counterpart. They often have interests that are in direct opposition to your own. In other words, they may be motivated to deceive you--> so when it comes to understanding the details of the deal, you should know what's correct, what's important to know, what's incorrect and what's not important to know. the research that you do will put you in a position of power to make a good deal for yourself

What are the dirty tricks of negotiating and how do you defend against them?: 6. Cloning

6. Cloning- Using decoys to negotiate the price down - called decoys bc never follow through with the deal. -Essentially, a negotiator creates fake accounts (if negotiating in a mediated context) or has friends, etc. contact you to negotiate on the thing you are selling. point is to get you to reduce the price. -Usually these people negotiate in mediated contexts, they are not serious buyers so they never make the trip to look at what you have offered. --The goal is to appear like they are negotiating in good faith and what they're really trying to do is poke the deal to look for holes --> to determine how soft you are on the price. --Another goal is to make you feel like serious buyers do not exist. tryinf to get you to feel frustrated that people are interested but never follow through with the arrangement -->They are trying to make it seem like your alternatives are terrible. -cloning gives people an idea of how low you're willing to go, and by not following through on the deal they're making you feel like if you were to get a good buyer at all you'll take the offer (whatever it is) --🅷🅾🆆 🆃🅾 🅳🅴🅵🅴🅽🅳-- (6a) Only negotiate in person--> cloning only really happens when you negotiate in a mediated context. so, make a rule that negotiation only occurs after someone comes looks at/inspects the item. This ensures that they are serious about the transaction and not just "kicking tires" as some people say. -You will weed out a lot of dreamers and schemers if you follow this advice. -there's a lot of people who just want to feel you out when it comes to a negotiation, often times people will be working together to get the best deal for themselves. If they wanna come and spend their time to check out the product/figure out a price, we can negotiate in person. -don't be afraid to tell people, I appreciate your interest but I never negotiate over mediated context, I might be flexible in the price but you'll have to come to check it out before we talk any further

What are the dirty tricks of negotiating and how do you defend against them?: 7. Cash King

7. Cash King-Bringing cash, having close to the desired amount, but not bringing the total. -For example, I was selling a motorcycle for $5,500 and the guy showed up with $5,000. He told me that although we had a deal, this is all he could muster despite our previous arrangement. They hope you feel like you are so close to the agreed upon price that it is not worth losing the deal over the remaining $$. They are hoping that you see the cash and you think, f**k it. --> (ex: EDC ticket) --🅷🅾🆆 🆃🅾 🅳🅴🅵🅴🅽🅳-- (7a) Insist on the actual offer, bro! 10/10 times it is a bluff -EX: I told the guy who brought $5,000 for my motorcycle that we had adeal at $5,500. He would have to honor that deal for us to move forward. He said he'd have to check and left to go to the bank. Miraculously (/s) he showed up 2 minutes later with the full $5,500. You may feel invested and may not want to lose the deal. But, the SAME IS TRUE FOR THEM! Their argument is "do you want to lose a deal over this trivial amount of money?" -Flip the script... that sword cuts both ways. Do they want to lose the deal over this trivial amount of money? Besides, you already agreed on the price, you are on the moral high ground here. -dont let people try to trick you out of deal

What is the Fundamental Attribution Error?

FAE= matrix that talks about how 'I' explain things based on the outcomes that occur and based on who was the one doing the performing YOU OTHERS Do well-----> you situation Do poorly--> Situation them If you do well → i'm a good person -If I do poorly → bad luck or a mistake -So we tend to give ourselves the benefit of the doubt whereas we don't give others the benefit of the doubt, and this can lead to a lot of problems. When there's an issue we blame the other person → 'there's no problem with me i'm perfect, you created an issue now you fix it" → this is wrong because you'll find that most of the time conflict is interdependent. In conflict you're involved in some degree so you have to look at the conflict episode and ask 'what have i done' and 'what do we do' EX: Bolkan and soccer → imagine he gets to give a PK, so he goes to kick and he makes the goal, when people ask him how he made the goal he's going to respond that it was because he's awesome at soccer. Now imagine he misses, when people ask him what happened he's most likely going to say 'the sun was in my eyes' 'bad luck'. But we do the opposite for others→ when it comes to others and they do something good we assume it's because of the situation. Imagine bolkan is playing against a rival team, the rival team goes for a PK and they make it were going to explain their goal as a lucky shot.. But if they miss the shot we're going to say it because they suck. This how we feel/act especially with our adversaries or outsiders

What are the results from studies that look at mediated communication in negotiation Scenarios? (4 total) Study 3: "Mind the Medium: A Qualitative Analysis of Email Negotiation"

Found that the same things that matter in face-to-face negotiation, matter online as well (this project studied negotiation through email in particular). This includes: i. Making multi-issue offers ii. Making positive comments iii. Suggesting ways to work together iv. Suggesting package trade-offsFound that "letting the negotiation go" leads to negative results. i. People who were not responsive tended to have partners who were less satisfied.

What are "dirty tricks"?

also known as 'difficult tactics' --> basically they represent things people do to deceive you, intimidate you, or to be aggressive toward you. you should be aware of these tactics so you can be prepared so you can deal with them using your rational brain NOT reacting to them using your emotional brain

What are the results from studies that look at mediated communication in negotiation Scenarios? (4 total) 2. "The dark side of negotiation: Examining the outcomes of face-to-face and computer- mediated negotiations among dark personalities"

a. Some personality traits lead people to be more manipulative and selfish: Machiavellianism. b. These people tend to do better when they negotiate face-to-face compared with when they are forced to negotiate in mediated contexts. c. This is because people are less likely to be manipulated by others' charm (so to speak) if you can move the negotiation to an online format as opposed to a face-to-face format.

What are the results from studies that look at mediated communication in negotiation Scenarios? (4 total) Study 4: "The impact of communication media on negotiation outcomes"

a. Looked at 4 communication mediums (face-to-face, video, phone, online chat) b. Face-to-face and video conference lead to more collaboration compared to phone and computer chat. -Partners were able to tell their counterparts were trying to be friendly (when they were, in fact, trying to be friendly) in face-to-face conditions twice as well as in the other conditions. --Face-to-face and video negotiators were the least likely to compete. -Face-to-face negotiation led to the fastest resolutions (this is true when compared against video negotiation too). -Objective outcomes did not change as a result of the communication medium. This means settlements were the same. -More rich media = more satisfaction with the outcome. 1. This is because the process of negotiation and the relationship matter too... not just $.