Table of Contents

Essentials of Negotiation:
Chapter 1: The nature of Negotiation
Chapter 2:Strategizing, Framing,and Planning
Chapter 3:Strategy and Tactics of Distribution Bargaining
Chapter 4:Strategy and Tactucs of Integrative Negotiation
Chapter 5:Perception,Cognition, and Communicaion
Chapter 6:Finging and Using Negotiation Leverage
Chapter 7: Ethics in Negotiation
Chapter 8: Global Negotiation
Chapter 9:Managing Difficult Negotiations:Individual Approaches
Leadership Communication:
Chapter 1:Developing Leadership Communication Strategy
Chapter 2:Creating Leadship Document
Chapter 3:Using Language to Achieve a Leadership Purpose
Chapter 4:Developing and Delivering Leadership Purpose
Chapter 5:Using Graphics and Powerpoint for a Leadership Edge
Chapter 6:Developing Emotional Intelligence and Cutural literacy to Strengthen Leadership Communication
Chapter 7:Leading Productive Management Meetings
Chapter 8:Building and Leading High-Performance Teams
Chapter 9:Establishing Leadership through Strategic Internal Communication
Chapter 10:Leading through Effective External Relatons

Negotiation Chapter 9:Managing Difficult Negotiations: Individual Approaches

Chapter 9: Managing Difficult Negotiations: Individual Approaches

When negotiations become difficult to resolve, problems may be traced to one or more of following causal elements:
- Characteristics of the way parties perceive themselve or other negotiators.
- Characteristics of the dontent of their communication.
- Characteristics in the process used to negotiator or manage conflict.
- Characteristics of the context of their negotiation.

Strategies for resolving impasse: Joint approaches There are three components:
Cognitive resolution. - to change how the parties view the situation.
Emotional resolution. – the way the parties feel about the impasse and the other party, and the amount of emotional energy they put into the negotiation.
Behavioral resolution. – processes address exactly what people will do in the future, and what agreement they make about how the future will be realized.

There are five major conflict-reduction strategies that can be used to resolve impasses:
Reducing tension and synchronizing de-escalation by seperating the parties(break-off face-to-face relations), tension release, acknowledging the other’s feeling:active listening, and synchronized de-escalation,
Improving the accuracy of communication by role reversal : can help negotiators to put themselves in the other psrty’s shoes and look at the issue from his or her perspective.
Controlling issues – “Fractionating” is a method of issue control that involves dividing a large conflict into small parts : 1)reduce the number of parties on each side, 2) control the number of substantive issues involved, 3) state issues in concrete terms rather than as (general) principles, 4)restrict the procedents involved, both procedural and substantive, 5) searching for ways to fractionate the big issues, and 6) depersonalize issues: separate them from the parties advocating them.
Establishing common ground – Several approaches are possible: establishing common goals, aligning against common enemies, agreeing to follow a common procedure, or establishing a common framework for approaching the negotiation problems.
Enhancing the desirability of options to the other party – There are several alternative strategies: give the other party a “yesable” proposal, ask for a different decision, sweeten the offer rather than intensifying the threat, and use legitimacy or objective criteria to evaluate solutions.

Mismatched models : intentional and otherwise
Responding to the other side’s hard distributive tactics – mean the distributive tactics that the other party applies in anegotiation to put pressure on negotiators to do something that is not in their best interest to do. As a pressured party you can respond to these tactics by: ignore them, cal them on it, respond in kind, and offer to change to more productive methods.
Responding when the other side has more power – when dealing with a party with more power, negotiators have at least four alternatives : protect themselves, cultivate their best alternative(BETNA), formulate a “trip wire alert system”, and correct the power imbalance.
The special problem of handling ultimatums – An altimatum is an attempt “to induce complisnce or force concessions from s presumsbly recalcitrant opponents.” Ultimatums typically have three components: 1)demand, 2) an attempt to create a sense of urgency, 3) a threat of punishment if compliance does not occurs.
Responding when the other side is being difficult

Negotiation Chapter 8:Global Negotiation

Chapter 8: Global Negotiation

The number of global negotiations is increasing rapidly. People today travel more frequently and farther, and business is more international in scope and extent than ever before. For many people and organizations, global negotiations have become the norm rather than an exortic activity that occurs only occasionally.

The American negotiating style Lebel tend to constrain our thinking and expectations such that we may perceive more consistency in the other person than actually exists, and labels may lock us into perceiving the other party’s behavior in a historically dated manner.
- How Non-Americans describe the American style. Tomy Koh, the former ambassador from singapore to the United States, noted The strengths of the American negotiators: 1) good preparations, 2) clear and plain speaking, 3) a focus on pragmatism over doctrine, 4) strong ability to recognize the other party’s perspective, 5) good understanding of the concession-making process, and 6) candid and straightforward communication.
- How American perspective on the American negotiating style. McDonald noted the weaknesses of American negotiators : 1) impatience, 2) arrogance, 3) poor listening skill, 4) insolarity, 5) legalism, and 6) naivete. On the other hand, he perceive the strengths of American negotiators: 1) friendliness, 2) fairness and honesty, 3) flexibility, 4) innovativeness, 5) pragmatism, 6) preparedness, and 7) cooperativeness.

What makes cross-border negotiations different?

There are two overall contexts that have an influence on cross-border negotiations:
1. Environmental context – includes “forces in the environment that are beyond the control of either party” that influence the negotiation. There are six factors that make global negotiations more challenging than domestic negotiations: Political and legal pluralism, international economics, foreign governments and bureaucracies, instability, ideology, culture, and external stakeholders.
2. Immediate context
· Relative bargaining power – one factor in cross-border negotiations that has received considerable research attention is the relative bargaqining power of the two parties in the negotiation.
· Levels of conflict – influence the negotiation process and outcome.
· Relationship between negotiators – the history of relations between the parties will influence the current negotiation.
· Immediate stakeholders

Hofstede’s dimensions of culture Hofstede’s research defines culture as the shared values and beliefs held hy members of a group, and is consideres the most comprehensive and extensive program of research on cultural dimensions in international business. He concludeed that foyr dimensions could summarize cultural differences: 1) individualism or colectivism , 2) power distance, 3) masculinity/femininity, and 4) ubcertainty avoidance.

How do cultural differences influence negotiations? Foster, drawing work by Weiss and Stripp, suggest that culture can influence negotiations across borders in eight different ways: 1) definition of negotiation, 2) selection of negotiators, 3) Protocol, 4) communication, 5) time, 6)risk propensity, 7)groups versus individuals, and 8) nature of agreements.

Culturally responsive negotiation strategies Several factors indicate that cross-border negotiators should not make large modifications to their approach:
1. Negotiators may not be able to modify their approach effectively.
2. Even if negotiators can modify their approach effectively, it does not mean that this will translate automatically into better negotiation outcome for their side.
3. Research suggests that negotiators may naturally negotiate differently when they are with people from their own culture than they are with people from other cultures.
4. Research gy Francis suggest that moderate adaptation may be more effective than “acting as the Romams do”

According to Weiss, when choosing a strategy, negotiators should be aware of their own and the other’s party’s culture in general, understand the specific factors in the current relationship, and predict or try to influence the other party’s approach. Weiss’s culturally responsive strategies may be arranged into three groups, based on the level of familiarity( low, moderate, high) that negotiator has with the other ‘s culture.
- Low familiarity : Employ agents or advisers, Bring in mediator(joint strategy), and induce the other party to use your approach.
- Moderate familiarity : Adapt to other party’s approach(unilateral strategy), and coordinate adjustment(joint strategy).
- High familiarity : Embrace the other party’s approach, improvise an approach, and effect symphony.

Negotiation Chapter 7:Ethics in Negotiation

Chapter 7 : Ethics in Negotiation

The effective negotiator must recognize when the questions are relevent and what factors must be considered to answer them. There are several major ethical questions that arise in negotiation:
1. What are ethics and how do they apply to negotiation?
2. What major types of rthical and unethical conduct are likely to coccur in negotiation?
3. How can negotiators deal with the other party’s use of deception?

What are ethics and why do they apply to negotiation?
Ethics proceed from particular philosophies, which support to a)define the nature of the world in which we live, and b) prescribe rules for living togrther. There are four type of ethics: 1)end-result ethics: in that the rightness of an action in determined by evaluating the pros and cons of its consequences, 2) rule ethics: in that the rightness of an action is determined by existing lawa and contemporary social standards that define what is right and wrong and where the line is., 3) social contract ethics: in that the rightness of an action is based on the customs and norms of a particular society or community., and 4) personalistic ethics: in that the rightness of an action is based on one’s own conscience and moral standards.

How do negotiators choose to use ethical or unethical tactics?
· Ethical tactics in negotiation are mostly about truth telling – concerned with standards of truth telling—how honest, candid, and disclosing a negotiator should be.
· Typologies of deceptive tactics – seen as inappropriate and unethical in negotiation.

Intentions and motives to use deceptive tactics
· The motivation to behave unethically
· The consequences of unethical conduct – based on whether the tactic is effective; how the other person, constituencies, and audiences evaluate the tactic; and how the negotiator evaluates the tactics.
· Explanations and justifications – the primary purpose is to rationalize, explain, or excuse the behavior—to verbalize some good, legitimate reason why this tactic was necessary.

How can negotiators deal with the other party’s use of deception?
· Asking probing questions about the other’s position, point of view, information, and so on may help you uncover the key information that was omitted.
· Recognize the tactic – ignore the tactic, ask questions, “call” the tactic, respond in kind, and discuss what you see and offer to help the other party change to move honest behaviors.

Negotiation Chapter 6: Finding and Using Negotiation Leverage

Chapter 6 : Finding and Using Nrgotiation Leverage

Leverage means the tools negotiators can use to give themselves an avantage or increase the propability of achieving their objectives. The concept of leverage is related to the use of power and influence.

Leverage as advantage: why is power important to negotiators? Seeking leverage in negotiation usually arises from one of two perceptions :
1. The negotiator believes he or she currently has less leverage than the other party.
2. The negotiator believes he or she needs more leverage than the other pary in increase the propability of securing desired outcome.

Sources of power – how people acquire power There are three sources of power:
1. Information and expertise – information power is derived from the negotiator’s ability to assemble and organize data to support his or her position, arguments, or desired outcomes.; Power derived from expertise is a special form of information power. Expert power is accorded to those who are seen as having achieved some level of command and mastery of a body of information.
2. Control over resources – People who control resources have the capacity to give them to someone who will do what they want, and withhold them from someone who does not do what they want.
3. Power based on one’s position – there are two kinds of power:
· Legitimate power – There are times when people respond to directions from another, even directions they do not like, because they feel it is proper fro the other to direct them and proper for them to obey.
· The location within an organizational structure – which leads to either formal authority or informal power based on where one is located relativew to flows of information or resources. Key location concepts include centrality, criticality, flexibility, and visibility.

Managing power: influence and persuasion There are two general paths by which people are persuaded. The first path occurs conciously and involves integration of the message into the individual’s previously existing cognitive structures. The other route to persuasion, the peripheral route, is characteristized by subtle cues and context, with less cognitive processing of the message.

The central route to influence: The message and its delivery There are three major issues to consider when structuring message:
· Message content – there are four questions that negotiators need to consider when constructuring persuasive argument: 1)how to make the offer attractive to the other party, 2) how to frame the message so the other party will say yes, 3)how to make messages normative, and 4) how to obtain agreements in principle.
· Message structure – There are four aspects of messages:
1. One- and two-sided messages : when negotiators try to persuade the other partyit is because they believe that the other holds an opinion defferent from theirs.
2. Message components. : negotiators can help the other party understand and accept their arguments by breaking them into smaller, more understandable pieces.
3. Repetition : encorages central-route processing and enhances that the message will be understood.
4. Conclusions : the negotiators can leave the coclusion open or leave conclusion unstated depending on the situation and types of the other party.
· Persuative style: how to pitch the message
There are four major elements of persuasive style:1)encorage active participation, 2)use vivid language and metaphors, 3)incite fears, 4)violate the receiver’s expectations.

Peripheral routes to influence There are three sets of strategies:
1. Aspects of messages that foster peripherall influence – there are two elements:
· Message order – the way in which the influence seeker chooses to order the argument.
· Distractions – the use of distraction to interfere with the target’s ability to think about argument.

2. Source characteristics that foster peripheral influence – there are three categories:
· Source credibility – depends on three things: the qualification of the source, the perceived trustworthiness of the source, and source likability.
· Personal attractiveness – there are many way of tactics that an individual can enhance his or her personal attractiveness to a target of influence or a negotiating opponent such as, friendliness, ingratiation, likability, perceived similarity, and emotion.
· Authority – people with authority have more influence than those without authority.

3. Aspects of context that foster peripheral influence. There are five strategies:
· Reciprocity – when you receive something from ahother person, tou should respond in the future with a favor in return.
· Commitment – once people have decided something, they can be remarkably persistent in their belief.
· Social proof – people look to others to determine the correct response in many situations.
· Scarcity – when things are less available, they will have more influence.
· Use of reward and punishment – First,negotiators can offer resources, or favors, to secure the other’s compliance and cooperation.Second, negotiators attempt to use this power is through pressure—that is, by the treat of punishment.

The role of receivers—targets of influence
1. attending to the other – there are three important behaviors: Make eye contact, Adjust body position, and Nonverbally encourage or discourage what the other says.
2. Exploring or ignoring the other’s position – Selectively paraphrase (ensures that both parties have understood each other acuurately), and reinforce points you like in the other party’s proposals.
3. Resisting the other’s influence -there are three major things that listeners can do to resist the other’s influence efforts: have a best alternative to anegotiated agreement (BATNA), make a public commitment (or get the other party to make one), and inoculate yourself against the other’s persuasive message.

Negotiation Chapter 5: Perception,cognition,and communication

Chapter 5: Perception, cognition, and Communication

Perception, cognition, and communication are fundamental processes that govern how individuals construct and interpret the interaction that yakes place in ahegotiation.

Perception and negotiation

The role of Perception
Negotiators approach each negotiation guided by their perceptions of past situations and current attitudes and behaviors. Perception is the process by which individuals connect to their environment. The perception is a “sense – making” process; people interpret their environment so that they can respond appropriately.

Perceptual distortion in Negotiation
In any given negotiation, the perceiver’s own needs, desires, motivations, and personal experiences may create a predisposition about the other party. Such predispositions are most problematic when they lead to biases and errors in perception and subsequent communication. There are four major perceptual errors:
· Stereotyping: is a very common distortion of the perceptual process.It occurs when one individual assigns attributes to another solely on the basis of the other’s membership in a particular social or demographic group.
· Halo effects: occurs when people generalize about variety of attributes based on the knowledge of one attibute of an individual.
· Selective perception: occurs when the perceiver singles out the certain information that supports or reinforces a prior belief, and filters out information that does not confirm that belief.
· Projection: occurs when people ascribe to others the characteristics or feelings that they possess themselves.

Framing
A frame is the subjective mechanism through which people evaluate and make sense out of situations, leading them to pursue or avoid subsequent actions. An important aspect of framing is the cognitive heuristics approach, which examines the ways in which negotiators make systematic errors in judgement when they process information.

Cognitive biases in negotiation
Cognitive biases, tend to impede negotiator performance; they include:
1. Irrational escalation of commitment
2. Mythical fixed–pie beliefs
3. Anchoring and adjustment
4. Framing
5. Availability of information
6. The winner’s curse
7. Overconfidence
8. The law of small numbers
9. Self-serving biases
10. Endownment effect
11. Ignoring others’ cognition
12. Reactive devaluation

Managing misperceptions and cognitive biases in negotiation mis perceptions and cognitive arise automatically and out of conscious awareness as negotiators gather and process information. So, the negotiators should be aware of the negative aspects of these effexts, and to discuss them in a structured manner within their team and with their counterparts.

What is communicated during negotiation? There are five categories of communication that take place during negotiations:
1. Offers and counteroffers – Bargainers have definite preferences and exhibit rational behavior by acting in accordance with those preferences. Acommunicative framework for negotiation is based on assumptions that 1)the communication of offers is a dynamic process;2)the offer process is interactive; and 3) various internal and external factors, drive the interaction and “motivate a bargainer to change his or her offer.
2. Information about alternatives – Communication in negotiation is not limited to the exchange of offers an dcounteroffers; another improtant aspect is how sharing information with the other party influences the negotiation process.
3. Information about outcomes – negotiators should be careful not to share their outcomes or even their positive reactions to the outcomes with the other party, especially if they are going to negotiate with that party again in the future.
4. Social Accounts – there are three important types: 1)explanation of mitigating circumstances; 2) explanations of exonerating circumstances; reframing explanations.
5. Communication about process – how it is going, or what procedures might be adopted to improve the situation.

How people communicate in negotiation there are two aspects that related to the “how” of communication:
1. Use of language - The characteristics of language that communicators use
2. Selections of acommunication chanel for sending and receiving messages.

How to improve communication in negotiation
1. The use of questions – In negotiations, asking good questions enables negotiators to secure a great deal of information about the other party’s position, supporting arguments, and needs. Besides, negotiators can use questions to manage difficult or stalled negotiations.
2. Listening – Active listening and reflecting are terms that are commonly used in the helping professions such as counseling and therapy. There are three major forms of listening: Passive listening, Acknowledgment, and Active listening.
3. Role reversal –Continually arguing for one particular position in debate leads to a “blindness of involvement,” or a self-reinforcing cycle of argumentation that prohibits negotiators from recognizing the possible compatibility between their own position and that of the other party.

Mood, emotion, and negotiation
The distinction between mood and emotion is based on three characteristics: specificity, intensity, and duration.
· Negotiations create both positive and negative emotions.
· Positive emotions generally have positive consequences for negotiations sush as, 1) Positive feeling are more likely to lead the parties toward ibtegrative processes.; 2) Positve feelings promote persistence; 3) Positive feelings result from fair procedures during negotiation.
· Emotions can be used strategically as negotiation tactics.
· Negative emotions generally have negative consequences for negotiations such as,
- Negative emotions may lead parties to define the situation as competitive or distributive.
- Negative emotions may lead parties to escalate the conflict.
- Negative emotions may lead parties to use retaliatory behavior and obtain poorer outcomes.
- Negative emotions may result from impasse.

Special communication considerations at the close of negotiations.
As negotiations come to close, negotiaors must attend to two key aspects of communication and negotiation simultaneously:
1. Avoiding fatal mistakes – achieving closure in negotiation generally concerns making decisions to accept offers, to compromise priorities, to trade off across issues with the other party, or some combination of these elements.
2. Achieving closure – negotiators should to know when to shut up, to avoid surrendering important information needlessly, and to refrain from making “dump remarks” that push a wavering counterpart way from the agreement he or she is almost ready to endorse.

Negotiation Chapter 4:Strategy and Tactics of Intergrative Negotiation

Chapter 4: Strategy and Tactics of Integrative Negotiation

Introduction

In distributive bargaining, the goals of the parties are initially at odds – or at least appear that way to some or all of the parties. In contrast, in integrative negotiation the goala of the parties are not mutually exclusive. If the one side achieves its goals, the other is not necessarily precluded from achieving its goals. Integrative negotiation is variously known as cooperative, collaborative, win-win, mutual gains, or problem solving. The fundamental structure of an inegrative organization situation is such that it allows both sides to achieve their objectives.

What makes integrative negotiation different? For a negotiation to be characterized as integrative, negotiators must also:
· Focus on commonalties rather than differences.
· Attempt to address needs and interests, not positions.
· Commit to meeting the needs of all involved parties.
· Exchange information and ideas.
· Invent options for mutual gains.
· Use objective criteria for standards of performance.

An overview of the integrative negotiation process The following processes tend to be central to achieving almost all integrative agreement.
· Creating a free flow of information – the effective information exchange promotes the development of good integrative solutions.
· Attempting to understand the other negotiator’s real needs and objectives.
· Emphasizing the commonalities between the parties and minimizing the differences
· Searching for solutions that meet the goals and objectives of both sides

Key steps in the integrative negotiation process There are four majorsteps in the integrative negotiation process:
1. Identify and define the problem
· Define the problem in a way that is mutually acceptable to both sides.
· State the problem with an eye toward practicality and comprehensiveness.
· State yhe problem as a goal and identify the obstacles to attaining this goal.
· Depersonalize the problem. – allows both sides to approach the issue as a problem “ \outthere” rather than as a problem that belongs to one side only.
· Separate the problem definition from the search for solutions.- don’t jump to solutions until the problem is fully defined.

2. Understand the problem fully – identify interest and needs
Interests are different from positions in that interests are underlying concerns, needs, desires, or fears that moyivate a negotiator to take a particular position.
· Types of interests.
- Substantive interests: relate to the focal issues under negotiation – economic and financial issues such as price or rate, or the substance of negotiation such as the devision of resources.
- Process interests: relate to the way a dispute is settled.
- Relationship interests: indecate that one or both parties value their relationship with each other and do not want take actions that will damage it.
- Interests in principle: concerning what is fair, what is right, what is acceptable, what is ethical, or what has been done in the past and should be done in the future.

· Some observations on interests. We may make several obsevations about interests and types of interests:

- There is almost always more than one type of interest in adispute.
- Parties can have different types of interests at take.
- Interests oftens stem from deeply rooted human needs or values.
- Interests can change over the time.
- There are many ways to get at interests.
- Getting interests is not always easy or to one’s best advantage. Critics of the “interests approach” to negotiation have often identified the difficulty of defining interests and taking them into consideration.
- Focusing on interests can be harmful to a group of negotiators whose concensus on a particular issue is built around a nified position rather than a more generalized set of interests.

3. Generate alternative solutions.
· Inventing options: generating alternative solutions by redefining the problem or problem set such as:
- Expand the pie.
- Logroll.
- Use nonspecific compensation.
- Cut the costs for compliance.
- Find a bridge solution.

· Generating alternative solutions to the problem as given.
· Brainstorming. The success of brainstorming depends on the amount of intellectual stimulation that occurs as different ideasare tossed around. Therefore , the following rules should be observed:
1) Avoid judging or evaluaing solutions.
2) Separate the people from the problem.
3) Be exhaustive in the brainstorming process.
4) Ask outsiders.

4. Evaluation and selection of alternatives
The following guidelines should be used in evaluating options and reaching a consensus, there are:
· Narrow the range of solution options: examine the list of options generated and focus on those that are strongly supported by one or more negotiators.
· Evaluate solutions on the basis of quality, acceptability, and standards: solutions should be judged on two major criteria: how good they are, and how acceptable they will be to those who have to implement them.
· Agree to the criteria in advance of evaluating options: negotiators should agree to the criteria for evaluating potential integrative solutions early in the process.
· Be willing to justify personal preferences.
· Be aware to the influence of intangibles in selection options.
· Use subgroups to evaluate complex options.
· Take time out of cool off.
· Explore different ways to logroll.
· Exploit differences in risk preference.
· Exploit differences in expectations.
· Exploit differences in time preference.
· Keep decisions tentative and condition until aspects of the final proposal are complete.
· Minimize formality and record keeping until final agreements are closed.

Factors that facilitate successful integrative negotiation

1. Some common objective or goal. Three types of goals – common(all parties share equally), shared(both parties work toward but that benefits each party differently), and joint(involves individuals with different personal goals agreeing to combine them in acollective effort.) – may facilitate the development of integrative agreements.

2. Faith in one’s problem – solving ability. Parties who believe they can work together usually are able to do so.

3. A belief in the validity of one’s own position and the other’s perspective. The purpose of integrative negotiation is not to question or challenge the other’s viewpoint, but to incorporate it into the definition of the problem and to attend to it as the parties search for mutually acceptable alternatives.

4. The motivation and commitment to work together. Motivation and commitment to problem solving can be enhanced in several ways:
· The parties can come to believe that they share a commom fate.
· The parties can demonstrate to each other that there is more to be gained by working together than by seperately.
· The parties can engage in commitment to each other before the negotiations begin.

5. Trust.Generating trust is complex, uncertain process; it depends in part on how the parties behave and in part on the parties’ personal characteristics. A number of key factors contribute to the development of trust between negotiators: 1)people are more likely to trust someone they perceive as similar to them or as holding a positive attitude toward them, 2)people often trust those who depend on them, 3)people are more likely to trust those who initiate cooperative, trusting behavior, 4)there is some evidence that giving a gift to the other negotiator may lead to increase trust, 5) people are more likely to trust those who make concessions.

6. Clear and accurate communication. For high-quality integrative negotiation, negotiators must be willing to share information about themselves and the other negotiators must understand the communication.

7. An understanding of dynamic of integrative negotiation. Training negotiators in integrative tactics – particularly in how to exchange information about priorities across issues and preferences within issues, and how to set high goals – significantly enhanced the frequency of integrative behaviors and led the parties to achieve higher joint outcomes.