ORGA 214 Final Exam

Risk of email

- Emotions and certain information cannot be communicated the same way in email vs. face to face - Social distance created may cause parties to be more confrontational and focus on their own interests too much, rather than considering the other parties' interests - Minimization of status differences: lower status parties may take more risks

Interest-based persuasion

Framing/pitching your idea as addressing the other person's needs

'Horizontal' constituents

Friends, relatives and co-workers whom a disputant feels obliged to consult and listen.

Principle of Liking

Should you show your liking for the other party immediately or wait a while? The most effective type of liking - in terms of getting what you want from someone- is not like the person immediately. Rather, people who grow to like someone are more effective in getting what they want than if thy show their liking for the other person immediately. Initially negative and later become positive..

Communication distortion

Since most of the negotiation done by agent, there is more opportunity for communication distortion to occur.

Authority-based persuasion

Tendency to defer to authority automatically Giving an order from the "top-down" Whenever you appeal to your formal position or authoritative rules or policies as a means of getting other to agree with your proposal

Principle of Social Proof

The Liking principle states that we are more agreeable with people whom we like. Liking for people is often based on superficial, arbitrary factors ( e.g., someone wearing sweatshirt emblazed with our university's name or with a hair similar to ours). Negotiators are more likely to make concession when negotiating with people they know and like

Inspiration and emotion-based persuasion

The Vision Channel Any appeal to an audience's overriding sense of purpose, values, or beliefs as the foundation for selling your idea.

Rationality-based persuasion

Trying to influence someone's attitudes, beliefs, or actions by offering reasons and/or evidence to justify a proposal on its merits.

Anchoring on the first offer

Unprepared negotiators are far more likely to fall into traps. When you come to the table unprepared, you put yourself at a distinct disadvantage. Set concrete goals for the negotiation in advance so you won't be swayed by others' influence tactics. Don't allow other negotiators to force you to give an answer right away.

Politics-based persuasion

Whenever you acknowledge that appearances may be as important as substance in your idea-selling strategy, work through coalitions and alliances, or make use of back channels and lobbying.

Relationships-based persuasion

Whenever you use similarity, liking, rapport, and reciprocity or rely on your existing network of contacts and friends to open doors as part of an idea-selling strategy.

Same time, different place model

- According to this model, people negotiate in real time but not physically in the same place, is often the alternative to face-to face negotiations. - the most common means are telephone, videoconference and emails. - In telephone and email communications, people lack facial and social cues such as emotional appeals - The exchange of nuanced information can also be constrained by email technology because its structure limited the breadth and depth of information that can be exchanged

Face to face communication

- Face- to face negotiation is the clear preference of most negotiators. - Face-to- face contact is crucial in the initiation of relationships and collaborations, and people are more cooperative when interacting face-to- face than via other forms of communication. - Face-to-face negotiations are particularly important when negotiators meet for the first time ( norms of interaction established and miscommunication removed) - Negotiators are more cooperative when interacting face-to face rather than over the telephone - Face-to-face meetings are ideal for wrestling with complex negotiations

Reasons for Your Own Resistance

- We don't like to be negative, but we don't like to be pushed - Change how you say no - The Neutral No: steady, non-inflected, and clear; concentrating on the business end of no, not the personal - Justify your no; acknowledge the other party's concerns without giving hope - Don't change your argument - Don't always have to wait for the other party to ask

Ways that having different cultures can obstruct negotiations

-They can create misunderstanding in communication. -Create difficulties not only understanding words, but also in interpreting actions. -Influences the form and substance of the deal you are trying to make. -Culture can influence " negotiation style, " the way persons from different cultures conduct themselves in negotiation sessions.

Reason's for Other's Resistance

1) Business culture - part of business climate to say yes and no 2) Personal experience and expectations 3) Context

Strategies for effectively working with agents

1) Capitalize on the agent's expertise; good agents will have a wealth of expertise in their particular area. 2) Tap into your agent's sources of information; access information from professional affiliation and network. 3) Discuss Ratification; agent has a limited authority in making concessions or type of agreement 4) Use your agent to help save face; blame your agent..... 5) Use your agent to buffer emotions; agents can be an effective emotional buffer between parties who may either dislike one another or are irrational types

Key Challenges of using an agent

1) Conflicting incentives 2) Shrinking bargaining zone 3) Communication distortion 4) Loss of control 5) Agreement at any cost

Negotiating with risk-averse parties

1) Don't rush the negotiating process. A negotiation that is moving too fast for one of the parties only heightens that person's perception of the risks in the proposed deal. 2) Devote attention to proposing rules and mechanisms that will reduce the apparent risks in the deal for the other side. 3) Make sure that your counterpart has sufficient information about you, your company, and the proposed deal. 4) Focus your efforts on building a relationship and fostering trust between the parties. 5) Consider restructuring the deal so that the deal proceeds step by step in a series of increments, rather than all at once.

Contexts of international negotiations

1) Environmental 2) Immediate

Do's and Don'ts of Saying No

1) Keep your eye on the issue, not the personal 2) Know your triggers 3) Don't give them too much to read 4) Don't weaken your No 5) Beware of misguided empathy 6) Avoid a battlefront attitude

Advantages of using an agent

1) Knowledge - specialized knowledge in areas that may be able to help you in a deal (ex. investment bankers) 2) Resources - may be able to provide access and opportunities that would otherwise be unavailable. 3) Skills - May be a better negotiator (experience, natural ability, training) 4) Strategic advantages - may be able to use negotiation tactics on behalf of the principal in a way that insulates the principal from their full impact (ex. good cop bad cop)

6 principles of persuasion

1) Liking 2) Reciprocity 3) Social proof; follow the lead of others 4) Consistency; alignment with clear commitment 5) Authority 6) Scarcity; people want more of what they can have less of

Ways that culture can affect negotiations

1) Negotiating goal: Contract or relationship? 2) Negotiating attitude: Win-Lose or Win-Win? 3) Personal style: Informal or formal? 4) Communication: Direct or indirect? 5) Sensitivity to time: High or low? 6) Emotionalism: High or low? 7) Building an agreement: Bottom up or top down? 8) Team organization: One leader or group consensus? 9) Risk taking: High or low? 10) Sensitivity to time: High or low?

Five considerations most important in email

1) Substance; the substantive component is the content of the message , contents can be ambiguous and misinterpreted unless there is some other clue in the message about how to interpret the content 2) Affect; the affect aspect of email message allows us to interpret the content (using symbols or emoticons) 3) Procedure; the procedural aspect of an e-mail is the way in which communication deal with and overcome the place/ time constraints ( the proceduaral aspect focuses on how people communicate about how they communicate e.g; I read email once a week, forwarding email to committee etc) 4) Relations; the rational aspect of an email message is the way in which communicators attempt to humanize interaction, some communicators never deal with the relationship aspect. 5) Permanent records; electronic communication can be a powerful form of social control, sometime people adjust both content and the tone of their messages accordingly- not express their views in the way they would via face to face.

Common mistakes of negotiation (5)

1) Viewing negotiation as a fixed pie 2) Anchoring on the first offer 3) Escalating commitment 4) Feeling too confident 5) Focusing too narrowly

Focusing too narrowly on the issues

According to Bazerman; narrow focus on the issues at stake can be a detriment, In particular, negotiators err by focusing too closely on short-term concerns, on their own desires, and on obvious issues at the expense of new ones. Ask the other party lots of questions about his positions and interests

Principle of Reciprocity

According to the reciprocity, we feel obligated to return in kind what others have offered or give to us. This means that if someone does us a favor or makes a concession, we feel obligated to return the favour or concession

Shrinking bargaining zone

Agent shrink the bargaining zone, thus adding agent into the picture means that more parties are dividing a fixed bargaining surplus. If the bargaining zone is small, this may mean that an impasses will occur.

Principle-agent relationship

An Agent acts on behalf of principle party, an agent has a stake in the outcome ( e.g., a real estate agent earns commission on the sale of a house)

Agreement at any cost

Because agents have an incentive to reach agreement, they may fall prey to "THE GETTING TO YES" bias in which agreement becomes more important than the contents of the deal.

Loss of control

Because an agent is negotiating in your stead, you are given up control over the process of negotiation and, the outcome.

Costs of using an agent

Cost; fees they charged for their services. Possible ineffectiveness May complicate the negotiation dynamic and thereby inhibit settlement

Escalating commitment

Do not the same mistake over and over. Think about the "sunk costs"

Immediate context

Factors over which the negotiators have influence and some measure of control: -Relative bargaining power -Levels of conflict -Relationship between negotiators -Desired outcomes -Immediate stakeholders

Environmental context

Factors that make international negotiations more challenging than domestic negotiations include: -Political and legal pluralism -International economics -Foreign governments and bureaucracies -Instability -Ideology -Culture -External stakeholders

Bureaucratic constituents

Hierarchy of decision-makers in companies, government agencies, tribes, schools and many other institutions.

Conflicting incentives

Most agent-principle relationship have an incompatible incentive structure; the agent's interests are not perfectly aligned with those of the principle. Incentive compatibility is the only way to assure the agent services your interest (in this case, principle should not reveal their BATNAs to their agents under any condition)

Viewing negotiation as a fixed pie

Negotiators assume that the pie of resources is fixed but the size of pie can be expand and create more value Share information with counterpart that could lead to wise tradeoffs

Feeling too confident

Overestimating the chances that your counterpart will meet your demands is a common and potentially devastating negotiation error. Look for information that might prove you wrong. Look for a feedback

Principle of Authority

People defer to experts Good expert offers a valuable and efficient shortcut to good decisions

Persuasion

Persuasion is governed by basic principles that can be taught, learned and applied, Business executives can bring scientific rigor to the business of securing consensus, cutting deals and winning concessions

Channels of persuasion

Pick 5

Warn of Dangers of Reneging - 'What If ...?'

Preparation is important to the disputes where there is a necessary gap in time between agreement and ratification of the agreement by constituents or a court. For example, in family, native title, environmental, succession and human rights disputes it is normal for a mediated or negotiated agreement to require court approval before the agreement becomes legally binding. As many lawyers can nervously testify, this pause provides a dangerous gap of days or weeks when one or more parties can be pressured by constituents or self-doubt to renege.

Ways to manage nfluential outsiders

Refuse to negotiate or mediate Adjourn until influential figures are "present" Carry on regardless Normalise Ask ritual "authority" question Insist on written authority within:- subjective range?objective range? Contract to use best endeavours to sell the agreement Opinion from an evaluative mediator or expert Speak to outside authority before negotiation Consult with outside influences before the negotiation and arrange decision-making process Mediator explains settlement/progress to outside authority before anyone else Warn of dangers of reneging - "What if ...?" Throw tantrum

Risk-taking: high or low?

Research supports the conclusion that certain cultures are more risk averse than others. (Geert Hofstede) In deal making, the negotiators' cultures can affect the willingness of one side to take risks—to divulge information, try new approaches, and tolerate uncertainties in a proposed course of action. The Japanese, with their emphasis on requiring large amount of information and their intricate group decision-making process, tend to be risk averse. Americans, by comparison, are risk takers.

Principle of Consistency

The consistency principle is the fundamental need to be consistent in our beliefs, feelings, and behaviours, not only to others, but also to ourselves. What are the implications of the consistency principle for the negotiator? If a negotiator agrees to something(i.e., particular set of terms etc), (s)he is motivated to behave in fashion consistent with his or her verbal commitment

Ask ritual "authority" questions

The fifth possible response to the mediator's knowledge or suspicion that one or more of the disputants will need to consult an outsider before signing any settlement, is for the mediator to ask ritualistically, 'do you have authority to settle this dispute?' This question can help to identify the key influencers in the deciding community are and by what process are the "outsiders" to be consulted.

Refuse to negotiate or mediate

The first response to knowledge or suspicion about influential outsiders is to refuse to negotiate or mediate. "I am not willing to waste time and money talking to some middle manager or person without authority to settle."

Normalize

The fourth response to the perceived pressure from outsiders, is for the mediator to give one or more 'normalising' speeches. The aim of these speeches is to attempt to convince one of the disputants that the need for outside ratification is 'normal' For example: Jill, in my experience it is normal for middle managers in large businesses or government to seek approval for the agreement you hope to reach today. They cannot risk their jobs by settling without higher level approval. If you insist on them having full authority to settle, their easiest escape is to leave the decision to a judge; then they will avoid being blamed for the outcome

Principle of Scarcity

The persuasive power of exclusive can be harnessed by any manager who comes into possession of information that's not broadly available and that supports an idea or initiative he or she would like the organization to adopt.

Adjourn until influential figures are "present"

The second response follows normally from the first. That is, one or more disputants may refuse to negotiate or mediate on major questions, unless and until key authority figures are 'present' in person or are available on the phone or teleconferencing facility during the mediation or negotiation.

Agree to use best endeavours

The seventh possible response to the mediator's (or negotiator's) knowledge or suspicion that one or more of the disputants will need to consult with influential outsiders before settling is to negotiate for the agent to use his/her 'best endeavours' to sell the outcome to the constituents.

Insist on Written Authority to Settle Within Subjective Range or Objective Range of 'Fairness'

The sixth possible response is for a mediator or negotiator to insist that some or all of the disputant(s) produce a written authority to settle. This written step may appear to provide more certainty than the ritualistic oral assurances set out in the previous response.

Carry on regardless

The third response to the mediator's suspicions or knowledge of key influencers, or absence of 'complete authority to settle', is to say nothing and continue the process.

Mediator Explains Settlement and Progress to Outside Authorities Before Anyone Else

This is another vital response which every mediator needs to add to his/her toolbox in order to deal with armchair critics who are eagerly awaiting the outcome of the mediation or negotiation.

Opinion from an evaluative mediator or expert

This method to help the representative to save face, job, and safety; This method involves hiring an evaluative mediator who is respected in the field in which the disputants are disputing; and/or bringing to the mediation or negotiation an expert in the field as an observer and commentator.

Speak to outside authority before negotiation

This process is an expensive and exhausting but it has the following benefits: The mediator gains new perspectives on the key hypotheses necessary to arrange a successful mediation. The outsider feels included in the problem solving process and is far less inclined to undermine participants' expectations and outcomes. The mediator's standard questions begin to create doubt and lower the expectations of the constituent(s). They may have had little or no experience of systematic problem solving, or be too emotionally involved to do so. The constituents begin to respect the mediator and the complexity of the task ahead. The constituents again feel included if the mediator also arranges for a process to consult them on the day of the joint mediation, or as the mediation progresses.

Throw a tantrum

This response involves the mediator expressing strong and theatrical disapproval when one party suddenly suggests that (s)he needs to consult with an influential outsider.

Consult with outside influences before the negotiation and arrange decision-making process

This response is to insist on an organized 'decision rule' within each group of constituents. There is a variety of methods by which groups can decide to make decisions on the key questions; For example, a mediator can typically go through the following three steps: (1) Brinkmanship and Doubt Creation 'I am not willing to mediate unless both groups decide clearly on how they will vote to approve or disapprove their respective representatives' recommendations.' (2) Facilitate Agreement on Each Group's 'Decision Rule' 'How will we make a decision as a group at the end of the mediation (3) Write Out and Publicise and 'Decision Rule' of Each Group Before the Joint Mediation or Negotiation Begins; This third step is helpful as it reduces the chances of a whole group later reneging on their decision rule