BEN Final

What Causes Impasses and Intractable Negotiations?

A negotiation becomes more tractable when it becomes easier to resolve, and intractable when it is more difficult to resolve •Intractable conflicts vary along -Divisiveness -Intensity

4-3-2 game

A-4 votes B-3 votes C-2 votes in order to get prize, atleast 5 votes are required...need to form coalition to get prize B+C (entities with less power typically form coalition quickly MOST COMMON) and stable weaker parties=relatively stable (A) make attractive offer to break coalition, (B) to defect coalition and that everyone wants to look good and be more powerful Downside of b defecting A will realize that B could be untrustworthy and C will also think that too

BATNA

best alternative to a negotiated agreement; fallback option second best option -Gives negotiator power to walk away -W/O batna have to accept -each negotiator figures out BATNA before joining negotiation -If alternatives are attractive, negotiators can: •Set their goals higher •Make fewer concessions -If there are no attractive alternatives: •Negotiators have much less bargaining power

How to calculate buyers surplus

buyer reservation price - settlement price

Bargaining

describes the competitive, win-lose situation

Key Steps to an Ideal Negotiation Process

phase 1: preparation phase 2: relationship building- if negotiation is important to you; similiarities/differences phase 3: info gathering phase 4: use info/to best advantage phase 5: bidding-compromises in keeping with other party phase 6: closing the deal- decide which strategy to use phase 7: implementing the agreement- what to do after agreement is reached

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

conflict

"sharp disagreement or opposition" and includes "the perceived divergence of interest, or a belief that the parties' current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously"

•Interpersonal conflict

-Conflict is between individuals •Conflict between bosses and subordinates, spouses, siblings, roommates, etc.

•Intragroup Conflict

-Conflict is within a group •Among team and committee members, within families, classes etc.

•Intrapersonal or intrapsychic conflict

-Conflict that occurs within an individual •We want an ice cream cone badly, but we know that ice cream is very fattening

•Third parties

-Bystanders who may be drawn into the negotiation specifically for the purpose of helping to resolve it -Third parties often can reshape a polarized situation into a constructive agreement

dilemma of honesty

-Concern about how much of the truth to tell the other party

Dilemma of trust

-Concern about how much should negotiators believe what the other party tells them

Intergroup Conflict

-Conflict can occur between organizations, warring nations, feuding families, or within splintered, fragmented communities -These negotiations are the most complex

•Issue framing and risk

-Frames can lead people to seek, avoid, or be neutral about risk in decision making and negotiation

•Ignoring others' cognitions

-Negotiators don't bother to ask about the other party's perceptions and thoughts -This leaves them to work with incomplete information, and thus produces faulty results

•Irrational escalation of commitment

-Negotiators maintain commitment to a course of action even when that commitment constitutes irrational behavior dont want to show mistakes; keep on wrong path for long period of time

•Deception by omission versus commission

-Omission - failing to disclose information that would benefit the other -Commission - actually lying about the common-value issue

Positions Taken During Negotiations

-Opening offers: where will you start? -Opening stance: what is your attitude? Competitive? Moderate? -Initial Concessions: Should any be made? If so, how large? •The role of concessions -Without them, there is either capitulation or deadlock •Patterns of concession making -The pattern contains valuable information •Final offers (making a commitment) -"This is all I can do"

•Availability of information

-Operates when information that is presented in vivid or attention-getting ways becomes easy to recall. -Becomes central and critical in evaluating events and options

•Self-serving biases

-People often explain another person's behavior by making attributions, either to the person or to the situation •Overestimate the role of personal or internal factors •Underestimate the role of situational or external factors

anchoring and adjustment

-The effect of the standard (anchor) against which subsequent adjustments (gains or losses) are measured -The anchor might be based on faulty or incomplete information, thus be misleading

Reactive devaluation

-The process of devaluing the other party's concessions simply because the other party made them not giving respect they deserve

•The power motive

-The purpose of using ethically ambiguous negotiating tactics is to increase the negotiator's power in the bargaining environment

•Overconfidence

-The tendency of negotiators to believe that their ability to be correct or accurate is greater than is actually true

•The law of small numbers

-The tendency of people to draw conclusions from small sample sizes

•Endowment effect

-The tendency to overvalue something you own or believe you possess

•The winner's curse

-The tendency to settle quickly on an item and then subsequently feel discomfort about a win that comes too easily

Why do negotiations take place?

-To agree on how to share or divide a limited resource -To create something new that neither party could attain on his or her own -To resolve a problem or dispute between the parties

The primary purpose of explanations and justifications is:

-To rationalize, explain, or excuse the behavior -To verbalize some good, legitimate reason why this tactic was necessary

Opening stance

-What is your attitude? • Competitive? Moderate? does it match the opening offer; ex. exagerated opening offer stance should match offer competitive=confident

WHEB DO THIRD PARTIES HELP

-intense emotions appear to be preventing a settlement -poor communication is beyond the ability of the negotiators to fix -misperceptions or stereotypes hinder productice excahgnes -repeated negative behaviors create barriers btwn parties -serious disagreement over importance collection or evaluation of data

Value claiming

-result of zero-sum or distributive situations where the object is to gain largest piece of resource

Dual concerns model

1. Contending -Actors pursue own outcomes strongly, show little concern for other party obtaining their desired outcomes (HIGH concern about own outcome, LOW concern about others outcome) 2. Yielding -Actors show little interest in whether they attain own outcomes, but are quite interested in whether the other party attains their outcomes (HIGH concern about others outcome, LOW concern about own outcome) 3. Inaction -Actors show little interest in whether they attain own outcomes, and little concern about whether the other party obtains their outcomes (LOW,LOW) 4. Problem solving -Actors show high concern in obtaining own outcomes, as well as high concern for the other party obtaining their outcomes (HIGH,HIGH) 5. Compromising -Actors show moderate concern in obtaining own outcomes, as well as moderate concern for the other party obtaining their outcomes (IN THE MIDDLE)

Four Approaches to Ethical Reasoning

1. End-result ethics -The rightness of an action is determined by evaluating its consequences; ex. cheating on a test and not getting caught 2. Duty ethics -The rightness of an action is determined by one's obligation to adhere to consistent principles, laws and social standards that define what is right and wrong; even though it is the law but it is hurting something will you still stand behind that law 3. Social contract ethics -The rightness of an action is based on the customs and norms of a particular society or community; ex. women do not get equal opportunities--seems like the right thing to do but may not seem right in another society 4. Personalistic ethics -The rightness of the action is based on one's own conscience and moral standards absolutess vs. relativeness

Names of distributive bargaining

1. Fixed pie bargaining 2. win-lose bargaining 3. zero sum bargaining

Key Elements in Managing Negotiations within Relationships

1. Reputation -Perceptual and highly subjective in nature -Shaped by past behavior -Influenced by an individual's personal characteristics and accomplishments. -Develops over time -Negative reputations are difficult to "repair" 2. •Trust -"An individual's belief in and willingness to act on the words, actions and decisions of another" -Three things that contribute to trust 1.Individual's chronic disposition toward trust 2.Situation factors 3.History of the relationship between the parties •Calculus-based trust -Individual will do what they say because they are rewarded for keeping their word or they fear the consequences of not doing what they say •Identification-based trust -Identification with the other's desires and intentions. Trust exists because the parties effectively understand and appreciate each other's wants 3. •Justice Can take several forms: -Distributive justice •The distribution of outcomes -Procedural justice •The process of determining outcomes -Interactional justice •How parties treat each other in one-to-one relationships

Distortion in Communication

1. Senders and receivers (individual communicators) -The more diverse their goals or the more antagonistic they are in their relationship, the greater the likelihood that distortions and errors in communication will occur 2. Messages -The symbolic forms by which information is communicated 3. Encoding -The process by which messages are put into symbolic form 4. Channels and media -The conduits by which messages are carried from one party to another -Messages are subject to distortion from channel noise or various forms of interference 5. Reception -The process of comprehension by receiving messages and decoding them into an understandable form -It might not be possible to capture fully the other's meaning, tone or words 6. Interpretation -Process of ascertaining the meaning and significance of decoded messages for the situation to go forward 7.Feedback -The process by which the receiver reacts to the sender's message -Absence of feedback can contribute to significant distortions by influencing the offers negotiators make

How people communicate in negotiation

1. Use of language -Logical level (proposals, offers) -Pragmatic level (semantics, syntax, style) 2. Use of nonverbal communication -Making eye contact -Adjusting body position -Nonverbally encouraging or discouraging what the other says semantic barrier-ppl use difficult words polarized language-exaggerate positive words for own position 3. •Selection of a communication channel • -Communication is experienced differently when it occurs through different channels -People negotiate through a variety of communication media - by phone, in writing and increasingly through electronic channels or virtual negotiations 4. •Use of questions: two basic categories -Manageable questions •cause attention or prepare the other person's thinking for further questions: -"May I ask you a question?" •getting information -"How much will this cost?" •generating thoughts -"Do you have any suggestions for improving this?" 5. •Questions -Unmanageable questions •cause difficulty -"Where did you get that dumb idea?" •give information -"Didn't you know we couldn't afford this?" • bring the discussion to a false conclusion -"Don't you think we have talked about this enough?"

Conceptualizing Culture and Negotiation

1. power distance: power distributed in social distribution...high score=listen to higher powerlow score=no rank •Cultures with stronger power distance will be more likely to have decision-making concentrated at the top. This will have an impact on the negotiation. 2. individualism vs collectivism: "i and me" vs. "We and us"ind. US=90 china=20 •Individualism/collectivism orientation influences a broad range of negotiation processes, outcomes, and preferences -Individualistic societies may be more likely to swap negotiators, using whatever short-term criteria seem appropriate -Collectivistic societies focus on relationships and will stay with the same negotiator for years 3. masc-fem:masc: power/position rankfem: nurturing 4. uncertainty/avoidance:high structured instructions.....hate confusion •Negotiators from high uncertainty avoidance cultures are less comfortable with ambiguous situations--want more certainty on details, etc. Mike bond 5th. long term (focused on future) vs. short term (value tradition, focused on past)mike mincoff 6th. indulgence (freedom of speech, dont feel powerless) vs. constraint (maintaining national order)

Types of Coalitions

1. •Potential coalition: an emergent interest group that has the potential to become a coalition by taking collective action but has not yet done so; coalition not active...but there is common interest so that they could pursue common goal -Two forms: •Latent coalitions -Emergent interest group that has not yet formed; •Dormant coalitions -Interest group that previously formed, but is currently inactive 2. •Operating coalition: one that is currently operating, active, and in place; -Two forms: •Established coalition -Relatively stable, active, and ongoing across an indefinite time and space -Members represent a broad range of interests •Temporary coalition -Operates for a short time -Focused on a single issue or problem 3. •Recurring coalitions: may have started as temporary, but then determined that the issue or problem does not remain resolved -Members need to remobilize themselves every time the presenting issue requires collective attention...does not warrant established coalition

Ten Best Practices for Negotiators

1.Be prepared — Understand and articulate your goals and interests — Set high but achievable aspirations for negotiation 2.Diagnose the fundamental structure of the negotiation — Make conscious decisions about the nature of the negotiation: is it a distributive or integrative negotiation or blend of the two — Choose strategies and tactics accordingly 3. Identify and work the BATNA — Be vigilant about the BATNA — Be aware of the other negotiator's BATNA 4. Be willing to walk away — Strong negotiators are willing to walk away when no agreement is better than a poor agreement — Have a clear walkaway point in mind where you will halt the negotiation 5. Master the key paradoxes of negotiation — Claiming value versus creating value — Sticking by your principles versus being resilient to the flow — Sticking with the strategy versus opportunistic pursuit of new options — Facing the dilemma of honesty: honest and open versus closed and opaque — Facing the dilemma of trust: trust versus distrust 6. Remember the intangibles — "See what is not there" — Ask questions — Take an observer or listener with you to the negotiation 7. Actively manage coalitions — Coalitions against you — Coalitions that support you — Undefined coalitions that may materialize for or against you 8. Savor and protect your reputation — Start negotiation with a positive reputation — Shape your reputation by acting in a consistent and fair manner 9. Remember that rationality and fairness are relative — Question your perceptions of fairness and ground them in clear principles — Find external benchmarks of fair outcomes — Engage in dialogue to reach consensus on fairness 10. Continue to learn from your experience — Practice the art and science of negotiation — Analyze each negotiation •Plan a personal reflection time after each negotiation •Periodically take a lesson from a trainer or a coach •Keep a personal diary on strengths and weaknesses and develop a plan to work on weaknesses

Eight Approaches to Studying Personality in Negotiation

1.Conflict management style •Two levels of concern underlie the five conflict management styles -Degree of assertiveness a party shows for his or her own outcomes -Degree of cooperativeness the party shows toward working for the other's outcomes •Two personality dimensions represent these levels of concern -Degree of assertiveness -Degree of cooperativeness Five major conflict management styles: •A competing style—high on assertiveness and low on cooperativeness •An accommodating style—low on assertiveness and high on cooperativeness •An avoiding style—low on both assertiveness and cooperativeness •A collaborating style—high on both assertiveness and cooperativeness •A compromising style—moderate on both assertiveness and cooperativeness 2.Social value orientation: Preferences regarding the kinds of outcomes people prefer in social settings where interdependence with others is required •Two orientations: -Pro-self or egoistic: primarily concerned with personal outcomes -Pro-social or cooperative: preference for outcomes that benefit both self and others 3.Interpersonal trust: Determined by the experiences that people have in dealing with others •Individuals differ in levels of interpersonal trust -High trusters: believe that others will be trustworthy and that they need to trustworthy themselves -Low trusters: believe that others cannot be trusted to observe the rules and may feel less pressure themselves to trust others 4.Self-efficacy and locus of control: The extent to which people perceive that they have control over events that occur: -High external locus of control: attributes the cause of events to external reasons (e.g., luck) -High internal locus of control: attributes the cause of events to internal reasons (e.g., ability) • •Locus of control appears to influence negotiator aspirations, preferences and outcomes 5.Self-monitoring: The extent to which people are responsive to the social cues that come from the social environment •High self-monitors: -Attentive to external, interpersonal information -Inclined to treat this information as cues to how one should behave •Low self-monitors: -Less attentive to external information that may cue behavior, -Guided more in their behavioral choices by inner, personal feelings 6.Machiavellianism: •Those scoring high in Machiavellianism: -Tend to be cynical about others' motives -More likely to behave unaltruistically and unsympathetically -Less willing to change their convictions under social pressure -More likely to tolerate behavior that violates social norms -More inclined to advocate the use of deception interpersonally 7.Face threat sensitivity: The concept of "face" refers to the value people place on their public image or reputation •Some people are more susceptible to reacting in a negative way to threats to face •Threats to one's image will make a negotiator competitive in a situation that might otherwise benefit from cooperative behavior 8.The "Big Five" personality factors: •Extraversion - sociable, assertive, talkative •Agreeableness - flexible, cooperative, trusting •Conscientiousness - responsible, organized, achievement oriented •Emotional stability - secure, confident, not anxious •Openness - imaginative, broad-minded, curious •Negotiators higher in extraversion and agreeableness were more likely to do worse in distributive bargaining •Effects of personality were lessened when negotiators had high aspirations for their own performance

Advice for Managing Agents

1.Decide whether you and the agent are compatible 2.Be clear with your "contract" and expectations 3.The agent should have no authority to make a binding commitment on any substantive issues 4.The agent should have the discretion to design and develop an effective overall negotiation process 5.The constituent should focus communication to the agent on interests, priorities, and alternatives, rather than specific settlement points 6.The constituent should establish clear expectations about the frequency and quality of reporting back to the constituent 7. The agent's authority should expand as the agent and constituent gain insight about the other parties through the negotiation process 8. Specific instructions to the agent by constituents should be put in writing and be available to show to the other side 9. The constituent should instruct the agent on what the agent can disclose in negotiation -- interests, ranges of acceptable settlement, key facts, the principal's identity, etc.

Key Steps in the Integrative Negotiation Process

1.Identify and define the problem 2.Understand the problem fully -identify interests and needs on both sides 3.Generate alternative solutions 4. Evaluate and select among alternatives

Functions of Conflict

1.Makes organizational members more aware and able to cope with problems through discussion. 2.Promises organizational change and adaptation. 3.Strengthens relationships and heightens morale. 4.Promotes awareness of self and others. 5.Enhances personal development. 6.Encourages psychological development—it helps people become more accurate and realistic in their self-appraisals. 7.Can be stimulating and fun.

Strategies for Resolving Impasses

1.Reaching agreement on rules and procedures: •Reaching agreement on rules and procedures -Obtain mutual agreement about the rules that will govern the negotiation -Determine a site for a meeting -Set a formal agenda -Determine who may attend the meetings -Set time limits for individual meetings -Set procedural rules -Follow specific dos and don'ts 2.Reducing tension and synchronizing de-escalation of hostility: •Reducing tension and synchronizing de-escalation -Separate the parties -Manage tension -Acknowledge the other's feelings: active listening -Synchronize de-escalation •Decide on a small concession that each side could make to signal good faith 3.Improving the accuracy of communication: •Improving the accuracy of communication -Imaging: parties engage in the following activities 1. how they see themselves 2. how the other party appears to them 3. how they think the other party would describe them 4. how they think the other party sees themselves 4.Controlling the number and size of issues: •Controlling the number and size of issues -Fractionate the negotiation •Reduce the number of parties on each side •Control the number of substantive issues involved •State issues in concrete terms rather than as principles •Search for ways to divide the big issues •Depersonalize issues: Separate them from the parties advocating them 5.Establishing common ground: •Establishing common ground -start with easily agree upon -Common enemies -Common expectations -Manage time constraints and deadlines -Reframe the parties' view of each other -Build trust 6.Enhancing the desirability of options and alternatives: •Enhancing the desirability of options to the other party -Give the other party an agreeable proposal -Ask for a different decision -Sweeten the offer rather than intensifying the threat

•Opening offer

starting point/target price

dual concerns model

Avoidance: Don't negotiate; •If one is able to meet one's needs without negotiating at all, it may make sense to use an avoidance strategy •It simply may not be worth the time and effort to negotiate Competition: I gain, ignore relationship; •distributive, win-lose bargaining Collaboration: I gain, you gain, enhance relationship; •integrative, win-win negotiation Accommodation: I let you win, enhance relationship; involves an imbalance of outcomes ("I lose, you win")

***What do you do in order to overcome impass?

Changing the Negotiation Setting •The negotiation setting -Changing locations can be a new start •Temporal (time) issues -Earlier compromises re-packaged may break impasse •Relational issues -Replacing an aggressive team member can signal change •Cultural issues -Changing strategy can change attitudes (i.e. bring in a mediator) •Neglecting the other side's problem •Too much of a focus on price •Positions over interests •Neglecting BATNAs

C11: How Agents, Constituents and Audiences Change Negotiations

Characteristics of audiences: •Audiences may or may not be dependent on the negotiators for the outcomes derived from the negotiation process •Audiences affect negotiations by the degree of their involvement in the process -Direct involvement -Indirect involvement •Audiences may vary in identity; composition; size; relationship to the negotiator, and role in the negotiation situation •Audiences make negotiators "try harder" •Negotiators seek a positive reaction from an audience •Pressures from audiences can push negotiators into "irrational" behavior •Audiences hold the negotiator accountable

Standards for Coalition Decision Making

Coalition decision rules -Three criteria to determine who receives what from the results of the coalition's efforts •Equity standard -Anyone who contributed more should receive more (in proportion to the contribution made) •Equality standard -Everyone should receive the same •Need standard -Parties should receive more in proportion to some demonstrated need for a larger share of the outcome

Communication in Negotiation

Communication processes, both verbal and nonverbal, are critical to achieving negotiation goals and to resolving conflicts.

The Nature of Multiparty Negotiations

Differences between two-party and multiparty negotiations: •Informational and computational complexity •Social complexity •Procedural complexity •Strategic complexity

What Is an Effective Group in a Multiparty Negotiation?

Effective groups and their members: 1.Share all relevant information 2.Focus on interests, not positions 3.Explain reasons behind statements 4.Talk in specific terms and use examples 5.Agree on what important words mean 6.Disagree openly with any member of the group 7.Make statements, then invite questions and comments 9.Design ways to test disagreements and solutions 10.Discuss "undiscussable" issues 11.Keep discussions focused 12.Expect participation by all members in all phases of the process 13.Make decisions by consensus 14.Conduct self-critiques

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

C10: Forms of Relationships

Four fundamental relationship forms: 1. Communal sharing: -A relation of unity, community, collective identity, typically enacted among close kin, common sense of belonging -Such relationships are found in: •Families •Clubs •Fraternal organizations •Ethnic Groups •Neighborhoods 2. Authority ranking -parties are not equal in power, see in hierarchy organizations people will dominate -A relationship of asymmetric differences, commonly exhibited in a hierarchical ordering of status and precedence -Examples include: •Subordinates to bosses •Soldiers to their commander 3. Equality matching -A one-to-one correspondence relationship in which people are distinct but equal, as manifested in balanced reciprocity; certain teams/groups work together and contribute -Examples include: •College roommates for housekeeping/chores 4. Market pricing -Based on metrics of valuation by which people compare different commodities and calculate exchange and cost/benefit ratios; only item is the commodity and the price is holding them together -Examples can be drawn from all kinds of buyer-seller transactions ex. highest bidder and no personal relationships

goals, strategy, planning

Goals: SMART goals •Strategy: The overall plan to achieve one's goals in a negotiation •Planning: The "action" component of the strategy process; i.e. how will I implement the strategy?

Typical Hardball Tactics

Good Cop/Bad Cop: one aggresive, the other soft approach; pushes to confess Lowball/Highball: very low offer (know never gonna happen) settlement price on lower side, if the seller make very high offer Bogey (playing up an issue of little importance): setting stage, get significant, using to advantage to gain concessions on major issues The Nibble (asking for a number of small concessions to): nibble as hook, give nothing Chicken—becomes winner take all: very serious negotiation, who can hold out longer Intimidation: significant level of power, seriousness of position/allies Aggressive Behavior: how much power/manipulative Snow Job (overwhelm the other party with information): confuse other party, lots of useless info

ZOPA (Zone of Possible Agreement)/Bargaining zone

IN between the sellers reservation price and the buyers reservation price

The Nature of Impasse

Impasse is a condition or state of the conflict in which there is no apparent quick or easy resolution •Impasse is not necessarily bad or destructive •Impasse does not have to be permanent •Impasse can be tactical or genuine -Tactical impasse: parties deliberately refuse to proceed as a way to gain leverage -Genuine impasse: parties feel unable to move forward without sacrificing something important •Impasse perceptions can differ from reality -The perception of impasse can be created by an intransigent negotiator who is looking to extract concessions from the other party -Intransigence can be defined as a party's unwillingness to move to any fallback position through concession or compromise

****How to Resolve Impasses

Impasses need to be resolved on three levels: •Cognitive resolution -Change how the parties view the situation •Emotional resolution -Change how the parties feel about the impasse •Behavioral resolution -Specify ways the parties can stop difficult conflict dynamics

Types of Third-Party Intervention

Mediation, Inquisition, Arbitration,autocracy Third-party intervention may be formal or informal •Formal interventions are designed intentionally, in advance and they follow a set of rules or standards •Informal interventions are incidental to the negotiation 1. •Arbitration resolves a disagreement by having a neutral third party impose a decision •There are several forms of arbitration -Voluntary arbitration—parties are not required to comply with the decision -Binding arbitration—parties are required to comply with the decision -Interest arbitration—a new contract is submitted -Grievance arbitration—refers to decisions about the interpretation of existing contracts •Arbitration may have negative effects (cont.): -The biasing effect •Arbitrators must be careful not to systematically favor one side and they must maintain an image of fairness and impartiality -The decision-acceptance effect •Arbitrated disputes may engender less commitment to the settlement than alternative forms of dispute resolution 2. •Mediation seeks to have the parties themselves develop and endorse the agreement •It has been called a form of "assisted negotiation" •It can help reduce or remove barriers to settlements, adding value to the negotiation process When to use mediation •The parties need to be open to receiving help—a phenomenon known as ripeness •The parties participate voluntarily—they are not forced to enter into the process •The mediator must be acceptable to all the parties to the dispute •Mediation effectiveness can be viewed from a variety of perspectives: -The mediator-parties relationship, -The relationship between the parties, -The issues and the parties themselves •Mediation appears to be more effective in situations marked by moderate levels of conflict •Mediation is less effective as a strategy when parties differ on important issues or have major differences in their expectations for a settlement 3. Process consultation: •"A set of activities on the part of a consultant that helps the client to perceive, understand, and act upon the process events which occur in the client's environment" •The objective is to defuse the emotional aspect of conflict and improve communication between the parties •Process consultants focus only on improving communication and conflict management procedures •Research findings indicate that process consultation: -Is less likely to work as an intervention when the parties are deeply locked in a dispute over one more major unresolved issues -May be an ineffective technique when dealing with short-term relationships -May be ineffective when the substantive issues in the dispute are distributive, or zero-sum -May be ineffective when the level of conflict is so high that the parties are more intent on revenge or retribution than reconciliation

Walkaway/resistance Point "sellers reservation"

Minimum must have or else they would leave

mythical fixed-pie beliefs

Negotiators assume that all negotiations (not just some) involve a fixed pie follow along distributive approach (win-lose), must have larger share of the pie, dies not allow someone to see

bilateral strategy

One that considers the impact of the other's strategy on one's own

Negotiations in Communal Relationships

Parties in a communal sharing relationship: •Are more cooperative and empathetic •Craft better quality agreements •Perform better on both decision making •Focus their attention on the other party's outcomes as well as their own •Focus attention on the norms that develop about the way that they work together •Are more likely to share information with the other and less likely to use coercive tactics •Are more likely to use indirect communication about conflict issues, and develop a unique conflict structure •May be more likely to use compromise or problem solving strategies for resolving conflicts

Interests, Rights, and Power

Parties in conflict use one of three frames: •Interests: people talk about their "positions" but often what is at stake is their underlying interests •Rights: people may be concerned about who is "right" - that is, who has legitimacy, who is correct, and what is fair •Power: people may wish to resolve a conflict on the basis of who is stronger

Characteristics of the Conflict Resolution Process

Processes that increase the likelihood of impasse: -The atmosphere is charged with anger, frustration and resentment -Channels of communication are closed or constrained -Original issues have become blurred and ill defined -Parties tend to perceive great differences in their respective positions -As anger and tension increase, parties become locked in their initial positions

Why Is Power Important to Negotiators?

Seeking power in negotiation arises from one of two perceptions: 1.The negotiator believes he or she currently has less power than the other party. 2.The negotiator believes he or she needs more power than the other party.

How to calculate sellers surplus

Settlement price - seller reservation price

initial concessions

Should any be made? If so, how large? •The role of concessions -Without them, there is either capitulation or deadlock •Patterns of concession making -The pattern contains valuable information •Final offers (making a commitment) -"This is all I can do"

FCPA

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (FCPA) is a United States federal law known primarily for two of its main provisions, one that addresses accounting transparency requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and another concerning bribery of foreign officials. The act was amended in 1988 and in 1998. An ongoing debate asks whether FCPA enforcement discourages US companies from investing abroad. •Department of Justice and the Securities Exchange Commission share FCPA enforcement authority. •Cases brought against individuals and companies have increased in the past few years. •Companies must ensure that they have procedures in place to educate and monitor employees, agents, sales representatives, distributors, etc. on the FCPA. •Bribe can include money or anything of value. •The antibribery provisions prohibit U.S. persons and businesses, U.S. and foreign public companies listed on stock exchanges in the United States from making corrupt payments to foreign officials to obtain or retain business. •Coverage is very broad and can also include the agents, employees, representatives of a U.S. business. Examples: • Influencing the contract procurement process • Evading taxes or penalties • Influencing the adjudication of lawsuits or enforcement actions • Obtaining exceptions to regulations Examples : Bribes •Cash •Gifts, Travel, Entertainment and other things of value •Charitable Contributions •Companies need to have procedures in place to review accounting records to ensure that there are no potential violations.

The Number of Partiesin a Negotiation

The basic possible roles for parties in a negotiation: •A negotiating dyad: two negotiators •Negotiating teams: more than 2 negotiators •Agents and constituencies: person on acting on own behalf •Bystanders and audiences: bystanders may have something at risk •Third parties

Managing Misperceptions and Cognitive Biases in Negotiation

The best advice that negotiators can follow is: •Be aware of the negative aspects of these biases •Discuss them in a structured manner within the team and with counterparts

Target point/aspiration point "Sellers target"

The best outcome each party can reasonably and realistically expect to obtain as a result of the negotiation; in a perfect world

process of perception

The process of ascribing meaning to messages and events is strongly influenced by the perceiver's current state of mind, role, and comprehension of earlier communications Sometimes people develop shortcuts to process information and these shortcuts create perceptual errors

Formal Intervention Methods

There are three fundamental types of formal third-party interventions: •Arbitration •Mediation •Process consultation

Abilities in Negotiation

Three kinds of abilities and negotiation behavior: •Cognitive ability: Synonymous with the general notion of intelligence, cognitive ability has been shown to influence: -Reasoning -Decision making -Information processing capacity -Learning -Adaptability to change, particularly in novel or complex situations •Emotional intelligence: Encompasses a set of discrete but related abilities: - Perceiving and expressing emotion accurately -Accessing emotion in facilitating thought -Comprehending and analyzing emotion -Regulating appropriately one's own emotions and those of others •Perspective-taking ability: "A negotiator's capacity to understand the other party's point of view during a negotiation and thereby to predict the other party's strategies and tactics" •Negotiators with higher perspective-taking ability -Negotiated contracts of higher value -Appear to be able to increase the concessions that the other party is willing to make

What Makes International Negotiations Different?

Two overall contexts have an influence on international negotiations: •Environmental context -Includes environmental forces that neither negotiator controls that influence the negotiation •Immediate context -Includes factors over which negotiators appear to have some control

Using Representatives in Negotiations

Using Representatives creates audiences. There are many different kinds of audiences: •Team Members •Constituents •Bystanders and Observers Consequences of audiences: They make negotiators 'Try Harder' Negotiators seek a positive reaction from them They can push negotiators into 'Irrational' behavior

A more complex model of deception in negotiation

W/2 additional things 1. individual differences: demographic factors (gender, age, nationality), personality characteristics, and moral development....women tend to do the kind thing while men tend to do what the right thing to do age and experience: older people see more clearly 2. contextual influences: past experience, incentives, relationship to opponent, relative power between negotiators, mode of communication competitive: winning is more important power motive caused for deception in negotiation diamond shape=facing decision helps user decide whether to use a deceptive tactic or not+ will the negotiator feel comfortable repeating a negotiating strategy 1. influence situation: figure out possible influence tactics 2. figure out if the tactics use deception 3. are you going to use deceptive tactics through power and push closer to win (usage of deception) look at whether it worked, self evaluation, and feedback reaction from the negotiator, constituency, and audience (looking down upon) A negotiator who employs an unethical tactic will experience positive or negative consequences. The consequences are based on: •Effectiveness - whether the tactic is effective •Reactions of others - how the other person, constituencies, and audiences evaluate the tactic •Reactions of self - how the negotiator evaluates the tactic, feels about using the tactic

How and Why Coalitions Form and Develop

When coalitions form: •Parties come together to pool efforts and resources in pursuit of common or overlapping goals •Control over resources becomes the basis for two critical pieces of the coalition formation process: -What each member brings to the coalition -What each member should receive from the coalition •Coalition formation is studied by: -A classic coalition game: The 4-3-2 game •Coalitions form to preserve or increase resources •Coalitions form in order to avoid a poor outcome that will occur if individuals acts alone How coalitions develop: •Coalitions start with a founder -Successful founders have extensive networks -Founders' benefits from early coalitions are likely to be small •Coalitions build by adding one member at a time -The founder finds an ally; -The founder can benefit if he or she understands the others' interests •Coalitions need to achieve critical mass -Find their "joining threshold" •A minimum number of people get on board •Others join because friends and associates are members •Coalitions exclude weaker members who can't contribute

integrative negotiation

a win-win negotiation in which the agreement involves no loss to either party, make the pie larger

Organizational network

form of relationship power; isolate: individual outside no power (least power) isolated dyad: not connected with the main system (less powerful) gatekeeper: the connection between the network and the outside world, anybody who wants to connect with the network must connect with the gatekeeper; very visible allows connectivity between the outside world; spokesperson star: significant amount of connectivity with other nodes, and connected to directly liaison: linking pin: external environment:

emotion

hinder negotiation

cognition

how negotiations use info based on strategies/tactics

mixed motive/integrative require

more maturity/patence compared to distributive

Model of deception in negotiation

power motive caused for deception in negotiation diamond shape=facing decision helps user decide whether to use a deceptive tactic or not+ will the negotiator feel comfortable repeating a negotiating strategy 1. influence situation: figure out possible influence tactics 2. figure out if the tactics use deception 3. are you going to use deceptive tactics through power and push closer to win (usage of deception) look at whether it worked, self evaluation, and feedback reaction from the negotiator, constituency, and audience (looking down upon) A negotiator who employs an unethical tactic will experience positive or negative consequences. The consequences are based on: •Effectiveness - whether the tactic is effective •Reactions of others - how the other person, constituencies, and audiences evaluate the tactic •Reactions of self - how the negotiator evaluates the tactic, feels about using the tactic

negotiation

refers to win-win situations such as those that occur when parties try to find a mutually acceptable solution to a complex conflict

Creating value

result of non-zero-sum or integrative situation where the object is to have both parties do well; enlarging the pie/integrative negotiation

important segment in distributive neg

share info/keep info; how you behave

Strategy vs. Tactics

strategy- an organization's long-term course of action; •The overall plan to achieve one's goals in a negotiation Tactics -short term plans and courses of action, often "corrective"; •adaptive moves designed to enact or pursue broad strategies -Tactics are subordinate to strategy

Dysfunctions of Conflict

when is conflict a bad thing? 1.Competitive, win-lose goals 2.Misperception and bias 3.Emotionality 4.Decreased communication 5.Blurred issues 6.Rigid commitments 7.Magnified differences, minimized similarities 8.Escalation of conflict

constructive conflict

when is conflict a good thing? conflict that helps build new insights and establishes new patterns in a relationship

Types of Relationships

•A negotiating dyad: When two isolated individuals negotiate for their own needs and interests •Agents and constituencies: A negotiator is not acting for himself but for others. We will call the negotiator in such situations an agent and the individuals he is representing a constituency •Additional negotiators In some instances there are more than two negotiators. There is a possibility that parties will form alliances •Negotiating teams A team is two or more parties on the same side who are collectively advocating the same positions and interests •Unrepresented bystanders and audiences Those who have some stake in a negotiation, care about the issues or the process by which a resolution is reached. Negotiators do not formally represent bystanders. Audience will include any individual or group of people not directly involved in or affected by a negotiation •Third parties Bystanders who may be drawn into the negotiation specifically for problem resolution

C6: Perceptual model of communication

•A sender has a meaning in mind and encodes this meaning into a message that is transmitted to a receiver •A receiver provides information about how the message was received and by becoming a sender and responding to, building on, or rebutting the original message (processes referred to as "feedback") encoding process: fluent in language, oral+written expression skilled; how message will be translated into a thought into a message that receiver will understand create message: Transmitted on medium: written message, email, text, face to face conversation, over phone, basically any form of communication that delivers the message to the receiver decode message: translating message and making more sense of it, cognition perception, creates some kind of meaning encode thought: choose particular medium of communication then it will be decoded noise: connected to every node in communication model; noise is anything that interferes with proper communication; if sender does not have good communications that is a sort of noise, grammatical/spelling errors in message, important message and would need a face to face but instead used another for of transmitting medium; NEED TO BE AWARE OF NOISE AND MINIMIZE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE

Prospective Coalition Member Roles

•Allies -Parties who are in agreement with a negotiator's goals and vision, and whom the negotiator trusts (HIGH,HIGH) •Opponents -People with whom a negotiator has conflicting goals and objectives, but who can be trusted to be principled and candid in their opposition (HIGH TRUST,LOW AGREEMENT) •Bedfellows -Parties with whom a negotiator has high agreement on the vision or objectives, but low to moderate levels of trust (HIGH AGREEMENT,LOW TRUST) •Fence Sitters -Parties who will not take a stand one way or the other -Fear taking a position because it could lock them in, be politically dangerous, or expose them to risk (MIDDLE, low trust) •Adversaries -Adversaries are low in agreement and cannot be trusted. (LOW,LOW)

How Can Negotiators Deal With the Other Party's Use of Deception?

•Ask probing questions •Phrase questions in different ways •"Call" the tactic •Ignore the tactic •Discuss what you see and offer to help the other party change to more honest behaviors

Tactical Tasks of Negotiators

•Assess outcome values and the costs of termination for the other party •Manage the other party's impressions •Modify the other party's perceptions •Manipulate the actual costs of delay or termination

Special Communication Considerations at the Close of Negotiations

•Avoiding mistakes -Keeping track of what you expect to happen -Reviewing the lessons from feedback for similar decisions in the future •Achieving closure -Avoid surrendering important information needlessly -Refrain from making "dumb remarks"

Benefits and Liabilities of Third-Party Intervention

•Benefits -Creating breathing space or a cooling-off period -Reestablishing or enhancing communications -Refocusing on the substantive issues -Remedying or repairing strained relationships -Establishing or recommitting to time limits and deadlines -Salvaging sunk costs -Increasing satisfaction with the conflict resolution process and its outcomes •Liabilities and limitations -The involvement of third parties signals a failure of the negotiation process -Intervention by a third party may signal that the parties have failed to grow, to build relationships, or to become adept in managing their own interdependencies •Each type of third-party intervention has its own particular advantages and disadvantages depending on the context

Bystanders and Audiences

•Bystanders -Those who have some stake in a negotiation, care about the issues or the process by which a resolution is reached -Negotiators do not formally represent bystanders •Audience -Any individual or group of people not directly involved in or affected by a negotiation -They may offer: •Input •Advice •Criticism

Common Tactics for Managing Constituencies and Audiences

•Clarify the role expectations and performance contract -Complex agent roles could include those of a bargainer, an advocate, a mediator or a fact-finder •Clarify the authority to make agreements -Decide how much authority they have without consulting the constituents •Manage constituency visibility -Limit one's own concessions by making negotiations visible -Use the constituency to show militancy -Use the constituency to limit one's own authority -Use great caution in exceeding one's authority •Manage constituency visibility (cont'd.) -Increase the possibility of concession to the other negotiator by reducing visibility to constituencies •Establish "privacy" prior to the beginning of negotiations •Screen visibility during negotiations •Be aware of time pressure -Establish a reputation for cooperation •Communicate indirectly with audiences and constituents -Communicate through superiors -Communicate through intermediaries •Communicate directly to the other party's constituency •Communicate directly to bystanders •Build relationships with audiences, constituents and other agents

Integrative Negotiation strategy

•Create a free flow of information •Attempt to understand the other negotiator's real needs and objectives •Emphasize the commonalties between the parties and minimize the differences •Search for solutions that meet the goals and objectives of both sides

Identify and Define the Problem (needs and wants)

•Define the problem in a way that is mutually acceptable to both sides; dont state from your perspective only •State the problem as a goal and identify the obstacles in attaining this goal; figure out jointly how to reach objective •Depersonalize the problem; dont always look at your perspective look at disengaged manner

Goals - The Focus That Drives Negotiation Strategy

•Determining goals is the first step in the negotiation process •The goals set have direct and indirect effects on the negotiator's strategy

Repairing a Relationship

•Diagnostic steps in beginning to work on improving a relationship: -What might be causing any present misunderstanding, and what can I do to understand it better? -What might be causing a lack of trust, and what can I do to begin to repair trust that might have been broken? •Diagnostic steps : -What might be causing one or both of us to feel coerced, and what can I do to put the focus on persuasion rather than coercion? -What might be causing one or both of us to feel disrespected, and what can I do to demonstrate acceptance and respect? •Diagnostic steps: -What might be causing one or both of us to get upset, and what can I do to balance emotion and reason?

Value differences that exist between negotiators include:

•Differences in interest •Differences in judgments about the future •Differences in risk tolerance •Differences in time preferences

The keys to implementing any of the four strategies are:

•Discovering the other party's resistance point •Influencing the other party's resistance point

perceptual errors

•Four major perceptual errors: -Stereotyping: -Is a very common distortion -Occurs when an individual assigns attributes to another solely on the basis of the other's membership in a particular social or demographic category ex. perception of what average indian person growing up, colored by previous understanding -Halo effects: -Are similar to stereotypes -Occur when an individual generalizes about a variety of attributes based on the knowledge of one attribute of an individual ex. suppose dealing with negotiate, heard somewhere this negotiate is aggressive -Selective perception: -Perpetuates stereotypes or halo effects -The perceive singles out information that supports a prior belief but filters out contrary information ex.singling out prior belief, turn blind eye dont notice at all -Projection: -People assign to others the characteristics or feelings that they possess themselves

frames

•Frames: -Represent the subjective mechanism through which people evaluate and make sense out of situations -Make sense of complex realities -Define a person, event or process

Assess the Other Party's Target, Resistance Point, and Costs of Terminating Negotiations

•Indirectly -Determine information opponent used to set: •Target •Resistance points •Directly -Opponent reveals the information

C7: Sources of Power -How People Acquire Power

•Informational sources of power, Personal sources of power, Power based on position in an organization, Relationship-based sources of power, Contextual sources of power 1. Information is the most common source of power -having access to information is essential. It shows how to assemble data, organize data, and support their decision; overwhelming people with a lot of information -Derived from the negotiator's ability to assemble and organize data to support his or her position, arguments, or desired outcomes -A tool to challenge the other party's position or desired outcomes, or to undermine the effectiveness of the other's negotiating arguments ex. in a distributive negotiation and in the market to buy and have additional information where the seller has a certain range to sell the property, the buyer can use it to his/her advantage. 2. Power Based on Personality and Individual Differences: •Motivational orientation -Specific motives to use power; play a role how much power will be sought and used in neg, each negotiator is different and has a different personality and may have a specific motive like seek out positions of authority •Disposition and skills -Orientation to cooperation: do better in integrative negotiation to reach agreement/competition: distributive negotiation to use as leverage to dominate position •Moral orientation -Philosophical orientation to power use: different values of power: treating others as equal power for all and how they address, more willing to share power, different take on using power 3. Power Based on Position in an Organization: Two major sources of power in an organization: •Legitimate power which is grounded in the title, duties, and responsibilities of a job description and "level" within an organization hierarchy; well-defined title and certain level; important tool in high context cultures (asia) play by rules of position bring in high rank in neg. to show that you are taking the negotiation seriously ex. holding title of president at MMA •Power based on the control of resources associated with that position; money, supplies, time, human capital, equipment, critical services, interpersonal support 4. Power Based on Relationships: •Goal interdependence: divergent goals and want to use power as what you want that may not be the same as a counterpoint (distributive negotiation) -How parties view their goals •Referent power -Based on an appeal to common experiences, common past, common fate, or membership in the same groups. Aspects of network structure that determine power include: •Centrality •Criticality and relevance •Flexibility •Visibility •Coalitions 5. Contextual Sources of Power: Power is based in the context, situation or environment in which negotiations take place. •BATNAs (THE BEST) -An alternative deal that a negotiator might pursue if she or he does not come to agreement with the current other party •Culture -Often contains implicit "rules" about use of power; power distance: people accept people in superior rank •Agents, constituencies and external audiences; not very high value it will allow you to lose alot of power in that context ex. start job process earlier on than last semester

What Is a Coalition

•Interacting groups of individuals •Deliberately constructed and issue oriented •Exist independent of formal structure •Require collective action to achieve goals •Members are trying to achieve outcomes that satisfy the interests of the coalition

Understand the Problem Fully— Identify Interests and Needs

•Interests: the underlying concerns, needs, desires, or fears that motivate a negotiator -Substantive interests relate to key issues in the negotiation -Process interests are related to the way the dispute is settled -Relationship interests indicate that one or both parties value their relationship

Generate Alternative Solutions

•Invent options by redefining the problem set: -Expand or modify the pie; adding sweeteners,both parties get larger share -Logroll: exchanging favors and identifying multiple issues, ask counterpart to rank them----which creates faster compromise -Cut the costs for compliance; reduced+ add sweeteners -Find a bridge solution; developing needs clearly and meeting other party halfway •Generate options to the problem as a given: -Brainstorming: working in groups, exhaust all options (Quantity>Quality) -Surveys: send out questionaires, acceptable to most occupants -Electronic brainstorming (email)

How to Improve Communication in Negotiation

•Listening 1.Passive listening: Receiving the message while providing no feedback to the sender 2.Acknowledgment: Receivers nod their heads, maintain eye contact, or interject responses 3.Active listening: Receivers restate or paraphrase the sender's message in their own language

Combining Mediation and Arbitration

•Mediation-arbitration (med-arb) -Should have a complementary and facilitating effect on dispute resolution, but only for final-offer arbitration •Arbitration-mediation (arb-med) -Stage 1: the arbitrator holds a hearing and reaches a decision but doesn't announce it -Stage 2: mediation occurs -Stage 3: the arbitration ruling is revealed and is binding on both parties

How Frames Work in Negotiation

•Mismatches in frames between parties are sources of conflict •Particular types of frames may lead to particular types of arguments

Overcoming the Disadvantage of Gender Differences

•Motivational interventions -Emphasize the mutual dependence of both parties in the negotiation relationship •Cognitive interventions -Focus on things that negotiators have in common that transcend gender, such as common goals or identities •Situational interventions -Alter the social roles that women assume in a negotiation to reduce the pressure of gender expectations Suggestions: •Anticipate gender-related triggers and be prepared. In highly competitive environments, men may be encouraged to maximize their outcomes by ramping up their competitive drive. Women, may be reminded that they're representing not just themselves but their colleagues, department, company, or customers. •Do your homework. Whether you're a man or a woman, learn as much as you can before salary negotiation. Research industry norms, investigate precedent, and talk to others who are already employed at the firm or in the industry. •If possible negotiate with companies that provide transparency surrounding compensation, benefits and performance expectations. This prevents inequity in compensation. Armed with transparent comparative information and a sense of acceptable targets, both men and women will achieve better outcomes. This will be especially beneficial for women in ambiguous, competitive negotiations.

Two Situations that Involve Multiple Parties

•Multiple parties are negotiating with one another and attempting to achieve a collective or group consensus. •Multiple individuals are present on each "side" of the negotiation

emotion and negotiation

•Negotiations create both positive and negative emotions •Positive emotions generally have positive consequences for negotiations -They are more likely to lead the parties toward more integrative processes •Negative emotions generally have negative consequences for negotiations -They may lead parties to define the situation as competitive or distributive -They may undermine a negotiator's ability to analyze the situation accurately, which adversely affects individual outcomes -They may lead parties to escalate the conflict positive frame: more confident/integrative strategy, less aggression negative: not put 100%, lots of anger

Cognitive Biases in Negotiation

•Negotiators have a tendency to make systematic errors when they process information. These errors, collectively labeled cognitive biases, tend to impede negotiator performance.

Dealing with Others Who Have More Power

•Never do an all-or-nothing deal: do not put all eggs in one basket and diversify risks •Make the other party smaller: deal with a number of individual in the company and not just one •Make yourself bigger; building coalitions with other low powered parties •Build momentum through doing deals in sequence •Use the power of competition to leverage power; explored other sale opportunities and use of batna •Constrain yourself, dont get into situation you know you have no power--need escape hatch •Good information is always a source of power; •Ask many questions to gain more information; open ended questions to have more info available •Do what you can to manage the process ex. case with mr. canny sales person was getting frustrated because the power balance was not in his favor

What is Communicated during Negotiation?

•Offers, counteroffers, and motives; depends on the type of negotiation •Information about alternatives; clarify batna to advantage •Information about outcomes; greater compromises/acceptable solutions better •Social accounts -Explanations of mitigating circumstances -Explanations of exonerating circumstances -Reframing explanations •Communication about process

unilateral strategy

•One that is made without active involvement of the other party

What Factors Shape a Negotiator's Predisposition to Use Unethical Tactics

•Personality differences -Competitiveness versus cooperativeness -Machiavellianism •Some individuals are more willing and able con artists •Are more likely to lie when they need to •Better able to lie without feeling anxious about it •More persuasive and effective in their lies -Locus of control •The degree to which individuals believe that the outcomes they obtain are largely a result of their own ability and effort (internal control) versus fate or chance (external control) •Individuals who are high in internal control are more likely to do what they think is right •Contextual influences on unethical conduct -Past experience -Role of incentives -Characteristics of the other party -Relationship between the negotiator and the other party -Relative power between the negotiators -Mode of communication -Acting as an agent versus representing your own views -Group and organizational norms and pressures

Manipulate the Actual Costs of Delay or Termination

•Plan disruptive action -Raise the costs of delay to the other party •Form an alliance with outsiders -Involve (or threaten to involve) other parties who can influence the outcome in your favor •Schedule manipulations -One party is usually more vulnerable to delaying than the other

Closing the Deal

•Provide alternatives (2 or 3 packages) •Assume the close: make them feel bad not to sign •Split the difference: meeting other party halfway •Exploding offers (tight deadlines): offer letter within number of days to sign; make up mind •Deal sweeteners: extra at the very end

*****CHAP 14 WATCH LECTURES Male and Female Negotiators: Theoretical Perspectives

•Relational view of others -Women: place greater emphasis on interaction goals (the interpersonal aspects of the negotiations) -Men: are driven more by task-specific goals •Control through empowerment -Women: are more likely to seek empowerment, "interaction among all parties in the relationship"Women tend to do better when they are negotiating for others compared to when they are negotiating for themselves. -Men: use power to achieve their own goals •Problem solving through dialogue -Women: seek to engage, listen and contribute -Men: convince the other party their position is the correct one and support various tactics and ploys that are used to win points during the discussion •Perceptions and stereotypes -Negative stereotypes about female bargainers shape expectations and behaviors. Women who display aggression are considered to be too pushy. This is not true for males. -Men have an advantage as a "dominant cultural stereotype"

Factors That Facilitate Successful Integrative Negotiation

•Some common objective or goal •Faith in one's own problem-solving ability •A belief in the validity of one's own position and the other's perspective •The motivation and commitment to work together •Trust •Clear and accurate communication •An understanding of the dynamics of integrative negotiation

why it is important to generate alternative solutions

•Take time to "cool off" •Keep decisions tentative and conditional until a final proposal is complete •Minimize formality, record keeping until final agreements are closed

How Agents, Constituents and Audiences Change Negotiations

•The first negotiating relationship is between the agent and constituent who must decide on their collective view of what they want to achieve in the negotiation •The second relationship is with the other party - the negotiator and the opposing negotiator who attempt to reach a viable and effective agreement •The third type of relationship is composed of external bystanders and observers. -They are affected by the negotiation outcome or have a vantage point from which to observe it -They have some strong need to comment on the process or the emerging outcome. Characteristics of audiences: •Audiences may or may not be dependent on the negotiators for the outcomes derived from the negotiation process •Audiences affect negotiations by the degree of their involvement in the process -Direct involvement -Indirect involvement •Audiences may vary in identity; composition; size; relationship to the negotiator, and role in the negotiation situation •Audiences make negotiators "try harder" •Negotiators seek a positive reaction from an audience •Pressures from audiences can push negotiators into "irrational" behavior •Audiences hold the negotiator accountable

How Agents, Constituents and Audiences Change Negotiations

•The first negotiating relationship is between the agent and constituent who must decide on their collective view of what they want to achieve in the negotiation •The second relationship is with the other party - the negotiator and the opposing negotiator who attempt to reach a viable and effective agreement •The third type of relationship is composed of external bystanders and observers. -They are affected by the negotiation outcome or have a vantage point from which to observe it -They have some strong need to comment on the process or the emerging outcome. Characteristics of audiences: •Audiences may or may not be dependent on the negotiators for the outcomes derived from the negotiation process •Audiences affect negotiations by the degree of their involvement in the process -Direct involvement -Indirect involvement •Audiences may vary in identity; composition; size; relationship to the negotiator, and role in the negotiation situation •Audiences make negotiators "try harder" •Negotiators seek a positive reaction from an audience •Pressures from audiences can push negotiators into "irrational" behavior •Audiences hold the negotiator accountable

Why Integrative Negotiation Is Difficult to Achieve

•The mixed-motive nature of most negotiating situations -Purely integrative or purely distributive situations are rare •The conflict over the distributive issues tends to drive out cooperation, trust needed for finding integrative solutions

Managing multiparty negotiation (3 stages)

•The prenegotiation stage -Characterized by many informal contacts among the parties -•Establish participants •Form coalitions •Define group member roles •Understand the costs and consequences of no agreement •Learn the issues and construct an agenda Agendas as effective decision aids: •Establish the issues that will be discussed •Define how each issue is discussed •Set the order in which issues are discussed •Introduce process issues (decision rules, discussion norms, member roles, discussion dynamics), and substantive issues •Assign time limits to various items •The formal negotiation stage -Structures a group discussion to achieve an effective and endorsed result •Appoint an appropriate chair •Use and restructure the agenda •Ensure diversity of information and perspectives -Key process steps: •Collect thoughts and composure before speaking •Understand the other person's position •Think of ways both parties can win •Consider the importance of the issue •Remember parties will likely work together in the future •Ensure consideration of all available information -The Delphi technique •An initial questionnaire, sent to all parties, asking for input -Brainstorming •Define a problem and generate as many solutions as possible without criticizing any of them -Nominal group technique •Brainstormed list of solutions ranked, rated, or evaluated •Manage conflict effectively •Review and manage the decision rules •Strive for a first agreement •Manage problem team members -Be specific about problem behaviors -Describe problem as team problem (use "we" versus "you") -Wait to give constructive criticism -Keep feedback professional -Verify that the other has heard and understood •The agreement phase -Parties select among the alternatives on the table •Select the best solution •Develop an action plan •Implement the action plan •Evaluate outcomes and the process

perception

•The process by which individuals connect to their environment. •A "sense-making" process -how you see particular situation; perceptions could be different

Rationalizations for Unethical Conduct

•The tactic was unavoidable •The tactic was harmless •The tactic will help to avoid negative consequences •The tactic will produce good consequences, or the tactic is altruistically motivated •"They had it coming," or "They deserve it," or "I'm just getting my due" •"They were going to do it anyway, so I will do it first" •"He started it" •The tactic is fair or appropriate to the situation Explanations of cheaters.. 1. angry or disturbed individuals unethical pattern 2. most cheaters: middle aged males and found difficult to accept defeat 3. unintentional cheaters and caught up in racing moment 4. most sought recognition and did want any prize

When Is Third-Party Involvement Appropriate?

•Third-party intervention is appropriate when negotiators believe they can no longer manage the situation on their own •When one negotiator requests intervention, that process must be acceptable to the other parties •If only one party recognizes a need for third-party intervention, he or she may have to persuade the other party to agree

Characteristics of the Issues

•Value differences -Vary from minor differences to major differences in ideology, lifestyle, of what is considered sacred and critical •High-stakes distributive bargaining -Parties may have inflated their negotiating positions to the point where there is no apparent zone of agreement

Commitments: Tactical Considerations

•Ways to abandon a committed position -Plan a way out -Let it die silently -Restate the commitment in more general terms -Minimize the damage to the relationship if the other backs off

Culturally Responsive Negotiation Strategies

•When choosing a strategy, negotiators should: -Be aware of their own and the other party's culture in general •Low Familiarity with cultureEmploy agents or advisers (unilateral strategy) Bring in a mediator (joint strategy) •Adapt to the other negotiator's approach (unilateral strategy) -Involves making conscious changes to your approach so it is more appealing to the other party •Coordinate adjustment (joint strategy) -Involves both parties making mutual adjustments to find a common process for negotiation •Embrace the other negotiator's approach (unilateral strategy) -Adopting completely the approach of the other negotiator (negotiator needs to completely bilingual and bicultural) •Improvise an approach (joint strategy) -Crafts an approach that is specifically tailored to the negotiation situation, other party, and circumstances

When to Use an Agent

•When the agent has distinct or unique knowledge or skills in the issues •When the agent has better negotiation skills •When you care more about the outcome than the relationship •When the agent has special friends, relationships or connections •When you are very emotionally involved in an issue or problem •When you want the flexibility to use negotiation tactics that require several parties •When your natural conflict management style is to compromise, accommodate or avoid •When there are higher stakes to gain

When to Negotiate for Yourself

•When you want to develop or reestablish a strong personal relationship with the other negotiator •When you need to repair a damaged relationship •When you want to learn a lot before you craft an agreement •When your negotiation skills are better than those of any available agent •When hiring an agent may be too costly •When the "image" of being represented by an agent may make the other side suspicious •When the agent is too emotionally involved, defensive and caught up in game playing

Action Strategies for Building Relationships in Coalitions

•With allies -Affirm agreement on collective vision or objective -Reaffirm quality of the relationship -Ask for advice and support •With opponents -Reaffirm relationship based in trust -State vision or position in a neutral manner -Engage in problem solving •With bedfellows -Reaffirm the agreement; acknowledge caution exists -Be clear about expectations in terms of support -Ask what they want from you -Reach agreement on how to work together •With fence sitters -State your position; find out where they stand -Apply gentle pressures -Focus on issue; have them tell you what it would take to gain their support •With adversaries -State your vision or goals -State your understanding of your adversary's position in a neutral way -Identify your own contributions to the poor relationship -End the meeting by restating your plan but without making demands