CHAPTER 7: Finding and using Negotiation Power

In this chapter, they discussed the nature of power in negotiation. They suggested that there were two major ways to think about power. “power over” which suggests that power is fundamentally dominating and coercive in nature, and “power with” suggesting that power is jointly shared with the other party to collectively develop joint goals and objectives. There is agreat tendency to see and define power as the former, but as we have discussed in this chapter and our review of the basic negotiation strategies “power with” is critical to successful integrative negotiation.

            They reviewed five major sources of power

·       Informational sources of power (information and expertise)

·       Personal source of power (psychological orientation, cognitive orientation, motivational orientation, certain dispositions, and moral orientation and skills).

·       Position-based sources of power (legitimate power and resource control)

·       Relationship-based power (goal interdependence and referent power and netwoks).

·       Contextual sources of power (availability of BATNAs, availability of agents, and the orgaizational or national culture in which the negotiation occurs).

In closing, we wish to stress two key points.

 First while we have presented many vehicles for attaining power in this chapter, it must be remembered that power can be highly elusive and fleeting in negotiation. Almost anything can be source of power if it gives the negotiator a temporary advantage over the other party(e.g.,BATNA or a piece of critical information).

Second, power is only the capacity to influence; using that power and skillfully exerthing influence on the other requires a great deal of sophistication and experience. 

CHAPTER 6: Communication

What is communicated during Negotiation

            Most of the communication during megotiation is not about negotiator preferences. Although the blend of integrative versus distributive content varies as a function of the issuses being discussed,it is also clear that the content of communication is only partly responsible for negotiation outcomes.

            In the following sections, we discuss five different categories of communication that take place during negotiations and then consider the question of whether more communication is always better than less communication.

1.      Offers, Counteroffers, and Motives

2.      Information about Alternatives

3.      Information about Outcomes

4.      Social accounts

5.      Communication about process

How people communicate in negotiation: Three aspects related to the “how” of communication:

1.      The characteristics of language that communicators use

2.       The use of nonverbal communication in negotiation

3.      The selection of a communication channel for sending and receiving messages

How to improve communication in negotiation: Three main techniques are available for improving communication in negotiation:

1.      The use of question

2.       Listening

3.      Role reversal

Special communication considerations at the close of negotiations, Negotiators must attend to two key aspects of communication and negotiation simultaneously:

1.      The avoidance of fatal mistakes

2.       The achieving closure

This chapter we have considered elements of the art and science of communication that are

relevant to under stading negotiations.

            They first addressed what is communicated during negotiation. Rather than simply being an exchange of preferences about solutions, negotiation covers a wideranging number of topics in an environment where each party is trying to influence the other. This was followed by an exploration of three issues related to how people communicate in negotiation: the characteristics of language, nonverbal communication, and the selection of a communication channel. They discussed at some length how the decision to negotiate in online environments alters negotiator behavior and outcomes.

            In the closing sections of the chapter they considered ways to improve communication in negotiation, including improvement of listening skills and the use of question, and special communication considerations at the close of negotiation.  

CHAPTER 5 : Perception, Cognition, and Emotion

Perception

Perception Defined

          Perception is the process by which individuals connect to their environment.

Perception is a “sense-making” process

This selective perception occurs through a number of perceptual “shortcuts” that allow uw to process information more readily. Unfortunately, the perceptual efficeiencies that result may come at the expense of accuracy.

Cognitive Biases in Negotiation

          So far they have examined how information is perceived, filtered, distorted, and framed. In this section, we examine how negotiators use information to make decisions during the negotiation. Rather than being perfect processors of information, it is quite clear that negotiators (like all decision makers) have a tendency to make systematic errors when they process information. These errors, collectively labeled cognitive biases, tend to impede negotiator performance: they include:

1.      The irrational escalation of commitment

2.      The mythical belief that the issues under negotiation are all fixed-pie

3.      The process of anchoring and adjustment in decision making

4.      Issue and problem framing

5.      The availability of information

6.      The winner’s curse

7.      Negotiator overconfidence

8.      The law of small numbers

9.      Self-serving biases

10.  The endowment effect

11.  The tendency to ignore others’ cognitions

12.  The process of reactive devaluation

Mood, Emotion, and Negotiation

            The role of mood and emotion in negotiation has been the subject of an increasing body of recent theory and research during the last decade. The distinction between mood and emotion is based on three characteristics: specificity, intensity, and duration. Mood states are more diffuse, less intense, and more enduring than emotion states, which tend to be more intense and directed at more specific targets. Emotions play important roles at various stages of negotiation interaction. There are many new and exciting developments in the study of mood, emotion, and negotiation, and we can present only a limited overview here. The following are some selected findings. 

In this chapther they have taken a multifaceted look at the role of perception, cognition, and emotion in negotiation. The first portion of the chapter presented a brief overview of the perceptual process and discussed four types of perceptual distortions: stereotyping, halo effects, selective perception, and projection. We then turned to a discussion of how framing influences perceptions in negotiation and how reframing and issue development both change negotiator perceptions during negotiations.

The chapter then discussed one of the most important recent areas of inquiry in negotiation, that of cognitive biases in negotiation. This was followed by consideration of ways to manage misperception and cognitive biases in negotiation. In a final section we considered mood and emotion in negotiation, which provides an important alternative to cognitive and perceptual processes for understanding negotiation behavior.

CHAPTER 4: Negotiation: Strategy and Plnning

Planning is a critically important activity in negotiation. Effective planning allows negotiatiors to desingn a road map that will guide them to agreement. While this map may frequently need to be modified and updated as discussions with the other side proceed, and as the world around the negotiation changes, working from the map is far more effective than attempting to work without it.

The foundation for surccess in negotiation is not in the game playing or the dramatics. The dominant force for success in negotiation is in the planning that takes place prior to the dialogue. Effective planning also requires hard work on the following points.

1.      Defining the issues

2.      Assembling issues and defining the bargaining mix.

3.      Defining interests

4.      Defining resistance points.

5.      Defining alternatives (BATNA)

6.      Definnig one’s own objectives (targets) and opening blds (where to start)

7.      Assessing constituents and the social context in which the negotiation will occur.

8.      Analyzing the other party.

9.      Planing the issue presentation and defense.

10.  Defining protocol – where and when the negotiation will occur, who will be there, what the agenda will be, and so on.

In this chapter they began with a basic understanding of the concepts of strategy, and

discussed the importance of setting clear goals, based on the key issues at stake. They then presented a model of negotiation strategy choice, returning to the familiar framework of the dual concerns model. A negotiator who carefully plans will make an effort to do the following:

1.      Understand the key issues that must be resolved in the upcoming negotiation.

2.      Assemble all the issues together and understand the complexity of the bargaining mix.

3.      Understand and define the key interests at stake that underlie the issues.

4.      Define the limits – the point where we will walk away or stop negotiating.

5.      Define the alternatives – other deals we could do if this deal does not work out.

6.      Clarify the target points to be achieved and the asking price where we will being the discussion.

7.      Understand my constituents, what they expect of me, and the social context.

8.      Understand the other party in the negotiation – their goals, issues, strategies, interests, limits, alternatives, targets, openings, and authority.

9.      Plan the process by which I will present and “sell” my ideas to the other party (and perhaps to my own constituency)

10.  Define the important points of protocol in the process – the agenda, who wil be at the table or observing the negotiation, where and when we will negotiate, and so on.

when negotiators are able to consider and evaluate each of these factors, they will know

what they want and will have a clear sense of direction on how to proceed. This sense of direction, and the confidence derived from it, is a very important factor in affecting negotiating outcomes.

CHAPTER: 3 Strategy and Tactics of Integrative Negotiation

Characteristics of the Interest – Based Negotiator

        a successful interest-based negotiator models the follwing traits:

Honesty and integrity.

        Interest-based negotiating requires a certain level of trust between the parties. Actions that demonstrate interest in all players’ concerns will help establish a trusting environment.

Abundance mentality.

            Those with an abundance mentality do not perceive a concession of monies,

prestige, contronl, and so on as something that makes their slice of the pie smaller, but merely as a way to enlarge the pie. A scarcity or zero-sum mentality says, “anything I give to you takes away from me.” A negotiator with an abundance mentality knows that making concessions helps build stronger long-term relationships.

Maturity.

            In his book Seven Habits of Highty Effective Leaders, Stephen Covey tefers to maturity as having the courage to stand up for your issues and values while being able to recognize that others’ issues and values are just as valid.

Systems orientation

            Systems thinkers will look at ways in which the entirn system can be optimized, rather than focusing on suboptimizing components of the system.

Superior listening skills.

            Ninety percent of communication is not in one’s words but in the whole context of the communication, including mode of expression, body language, and many other cues. Effective listening also requires that one avoid listening only from his or her fram of reference.

            In this chapter, they are reviewed the strategy and tactics of integrative negotiation. The fundamental structure of integrative negotiation is one within the parties are able to define goals that allow both sides to achieve their objectives. Integrative negotiation is the process of defining these goals and engaging in a process that permits both parties to maximize their objectives.

            The chapter vegan with an overview of the integrative negotiation process.  A high level of concern for both sides achieving their own objectives propels a collaborative, problem-solving approach. Negotiators frequently fail at integrative negotiation because they fail to perceive the integrative potential of the negotiating situation. Successful integrative negotiation requires several processes.

 First, the parties must create a free flow of information and an open exchange of ideas.

Second, they must understand each other’s true needs and objectives.

Third, they must focus on their similarities, emphasizing their commonalities rather than their differences.

Finally, they must engage in search for solutions that meet the goals of both sides.

This is a very different set of processes from those in distributivng bargaining, described in chapter 2. The four kay steps in the integrative negotiation process are identifying and defining the problem, identifying interests and needs, generating alternative solutions, and evaluating and selecting alternatives. For each of these steps, we discussed techniques and tactics to make the process successful.

They then discussed various factors that facilitate successful integrative negotiation.

First, the process will be greatly facilitated by some form of common goal or objective. This goal may be one that the parties both want to achieve, one they want to share, or one they could not possibly attain unless they worked togerther

Second, they must have faith in their problem-solving ability.

Third, the parties must be willing to believe that the other’s needs are valid.

Fourth, They must share a motivation and commitment to work togerther, to make their relationship a productive one.

Fifth, they must be able to trust each other and to work hard to establish and maintain that trust.

Sixth, there must be clear and accurate communication about what each one wants and an effort to understanding of the dynamics of integrative negotiations.  

In spite of all of these suggestions, integrative negotiation is not easy – especially for parties who are locked in conflict, defensiveness, and a hard – line position. Only by working to create the necessary conditions for integrative negotiation can the process unfold successfully. 

CHAPTER: 2 Strategy and Tactics of Distributive Bargaining

In Chaper 2, I am learned about the basic structure of competitive or distributive bargaining situations and some of the strategies and tactics used in distributive bargaining Distributive bargaining  begins with setthing opening, target, and resistance points. One can learn the other party’s starting points and his or her target points direectly or through inference. Usually one won’t know the other party’s resistance points (the points beyond which she or he will not go) until late in negotiation – they are often carefully concealed. All points are the most critical. The spread between the parties’ resistance points defines the bargining range as possible. If negoative, successful negotation may be impossible.

It is rare that a negotiation includes only one item: more typically, a set of items, referred to as a bargaining mix, is negotated. Each item in a bargaining mix can have opening, target , and resistance points. The bargaining mix may provide opportunities for bundling issues together, trading off across issues, or displaying mutually concessionary behavior.

Uder the sructure of distributive bargaining, a negotiator has many options to achieve a successful resolution, most of which fall within two broad efforts: to influence the other party’s belief about what is possible and to learn as much as possivle about the other party’s negotiator’s basic goal is to reach a final settlement as close to the other party’s resistance point as possible: to achieve this goal, negotiators work to gather information about the opposition and its positions. To convince members of the other party to change their minds about their ability to achieve their own goals: and to justify their own objectives as desirable, necessary, or even inevitable.

Distributive bargaining is basically a conflict situation, wherein parties seek their own advantage sometimes through concealing information, attempting to mislead, os using manipulative actions. All these tactics can easily escalate interaction from calm discussion to bitter hostility. Yet negotiation is the attempt to resolve a conflict without force, without fighting. Further, to be successful, both parties to the negotiation must feel at the end that the outcome was the best they could achieve and that it is worth accepting and supporting. Hence, effective distributive bargaining is a process that requires careful planning, strong execution, and constant monitoring of the other party’s reactions. Finally, distributive bargaining skills are important when at the value claiming stage of any negotiation. This is descussed in more detail in the next chapter on integrative negotiation.

CHAPTER 1 : The Nature of Negotiation

A Few Words about Our Style and Approach

          We need to say several things about how we will approach this subject.

1.      We will briefly define negotiation. Negotiation is a form of decision making in which two or more parties talk with one another in an effort to resolve their opposing interests.

For most people, bargaining and negotiation mean the same thing, however, we will be quite distinctive in the way we use the two words.

2.      Many people assume that the “heart of negotiation” is the give-and –take process used to reach an agreement. While that give-and –take process is extremely important , negotiation is a very comolex social process: many lf the most important factors that shape a negotiation result do not occur during the megotiation: they occur before the parties start to negotiate, or shape the context around the negotiation. The nature of nagotiation as a tool for agreement.

3.      Our insinghts into negotiation are drawn from three sources.

3.1                          Our Experience as negotiators ourselves and the rich number of negotiations that occur every day in our own lives and in the lives lf people around the world.

3.2                          Source is the media – television, radio, newspaper, magazine, and Internet. The report on actual negotiations every day. We will use quotes and examples from the media to highlight key points, insights, and applications throughout the book.

3.3                          Source is the wealth of social science research that has been conducted on numerous aspects of negotiation. This research has been conducted for more than 50 years in the fields of economics, psychology, political science, communication, labor relations, law, sociology, and anthropology.

When you shouldn’t Negotiate

            When you’d lose the farm

            If uou’re in a situation where you could lose everything, shoose other rather than negotiate.

            When you’re sold out

            When  you’re running at capacity, don’t deal. Raise your prices instead.

            When the demands are unethical

            Don’t negotiate if your counterpart asks for something you cannot support be cause it’s illegal, unethical, or morally inappropriate – for example, either paying or accepthing a bribe. When your character or your reputation is compromised, you lose in the long run.

            When you don’t care

            If you have no stake in the outcome, don’t negotiate. You have everything to lose and nothing to gain.

            When you don’t have time

            When you’re pressed for time, you may choose not to negotiate. If the time pressure works against you, you’ll make mistakes, you give in too quickly, and you may fail to consider the implications of your concessions. When under the gun, you’ll settle for less than you could otherwise get.

            When they act in bad faith.

            Stop the negotiation when your counterpart shows signs of acting in bad faith. If you can’t trust their negotiating, you can’t their agreement. In this case negotiation is of little or no value. Stick to your guns and cover your position, or discredit them.

           

When waiting would improve your position.

            Perhaps you’ll have a new technology available soon. Maybe your financial situation will improve. Another opportunity may present itself. If the odds are good that you’ll gain ground with a delay, wait.

            When you’re not prepared

            If you don’t prepare, you’ll think of all your bestquestions, responses, and concessions on the way home. Gathering  your reconnaissance and rehearsing the negotation will pay off handsomely. If you’re not ready, just say “No”

Interdependence

            One of the key characteristics of a negotiation situation is that the parties need each other in order to achieve their preferred objectives or outcomes. That is, either they must coordinate with each other to achieve their own objectives, or they choose to work together because the possible outcome is better than they can achieve by working on their own. When the parties depend on each other to achieve their own preferred outcome they are interdependent.

Conflict

            A potential consequence of interdependent relationships is conflict. Conflict can result from the strongly divergent need of the two parties or from misperceptions and misunderstandings. Conflict can occur when the two parties are working toward the same goal and generally want the some outcome or when both parties want very different outcomes.

Definitions

            Conflict may be defined as a “sharp disagreement or opposition, as of interests, ideas, etc” and includes “the perceived divergence of interest, or a belief that the parties’ current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously” Conflict results from “the interaction of interdependent people who perceived incompatible goals and interference from each other in achieving those goals.”