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.

Negotiation Chapter 3:Strategy and Tactics of Distributive Bargaining

Chapter 3: Strategy and Tactics of Distributive Bargaining

In a distributive bargaining situation, the goals of one party are usually in fundamental and direct conflict with the goals of the other party. Resources are fixed and limited, and both paties want to maximize their share of the outcomes to be obtained. Distributive bargaining is basically a competition over who is going to get the most of the limited resource.

There are two reasons that every negotiator should be familiar with distributive bargaining. First, some interdependent situations that negotiators face are distributive, and to do well in them negotiators need to understand how they work. Second, because many people use distributive bargaining strategies and tactics almost exclusively, all negotiators will find it improtant to know how to counter their effects.

The distributive bargaining situation
Both parties to a negotiation should establish their starting, target, and resistance points, at least implicitly, if not explicitly, before beginning a negotiation.Starting points are usually in the opening statements each party makes. The target point is usually learned or inferred as negotiations get under way. People typically give up the margin between their starting points and target points as they make concessions. The resistance point, the point beyond which a person will not go and would rather break off negotiations, is not known to the other party and should be kept secret.

The spread between the resistance points,called the bargaining range, settlement range, or zone of potential agreement, is particularly importnt. In this area the actual bargaining
takes place, for anything outside these points will be summarily rejected by one of the two negotiators.

The role of alternatives to anegotiated agreement
In addition to opening bids, target points, andresistance points, a fourth factor may enter the negotiations; an alternative outcome that can be obtained by completing a different party. An alternative point can be identical to the resistance point, although the two do not necessarily have to be the same.

Alternatives are important because they give the negotiator power to walk away from the negotiation when the emerging deal is not very good.

1. Settlement point – The fundamental process of distributive bargaining is to reach a settlement within a positive bargaining range. The objective of both parties is to obtain as much of the bargaining range as possible – that is, to get the settlement as close to the other party’s resistance point as possible.
2. Bargaining mix – Each item in the mix has its own starting, target, and resistance points. Negotiators need to know what is important to them and to the other party, and they need to make sure they take these priorities into account during the planning process.

Fundamental Strategy

The prime objective in distributive bargaining is to maximize the value of this single deal. In all distributive bargaining situations, there are two important tasks: 1) discovering the other party’s resistance point, and 2) influencing the other party’s resistance point.

1. Discovering the other party’s resistance point. The more you can learn about the other party’s outcome values, resistance point, motives, feeling of confidence, and so on, the more able you will be to strike a favorable agreement.

2. Influencing the other party’s resistance point
The following factors are important in attempting to influence the other person’s resistance point: 1) the value the other attaches to a particular outcome, 2) the costs the other attaches to delay or difficulty in negotiations, and 3) the cost the other attaches to having the negotiations aborted.

To explain how these factors can affect the process of distributive bargaining, we will make four major propositions :
· The other party’s resistance point will vary directly with his or her estimate of the cost of delay or aborting negotiations.
· The other’s resistance point ill vary inversely with his or her cost of delay or aborting.
· A resistance point will vary directly with the value the other party attaches to that outcome.
· The other’s resistance point varies inversely with the perceived value yhe first party attaches to an outcome.

Tactical tasks
There are four important tactical tasks emerging for a negotiatot in a distributive bargaining situation:
1. Assess Outcome Value and the Costs of Termination. An important first step for a negotiator is to get information about the other party’s outcome values and resistance point. The negotiator can pursue two general routes: getting information indirectly about the background factors behind an issue (indirect assessment) or getting information directly from the other party about outcome values and resistance points (direct assessment).

2. Manage the other party’s impressions. As a negotiator, an important tactical task may be to prevent the other party from getting accurate information about his/her position by screening actual information about positions and representing them to the other to believe them.
· Screening activities. The simplest way to screen a position is to say and do as little as possible.
· Direct action to alter impressions. Negotiators can take many actions to present facts that will directly enhance their position or at least make it appear strongeer to the other party by using Selective Presentation, in which negotiators reveal only the fact necessary to support their case and lead the other party to form the desired impression of their resistance point ot to open up new possabilities for agreement that are more favorable to the presenter than those that currently exist.

3. Modify the other party’s perceptions. Thera are several approaches to modifying the other party’s perceptions:
· To interpret for the other party what the outcomes of his or her proposal will really be.
· To modifying the other’s perceptions is to conceal information.

4. Manipulate the actual costs of delay or termination. There are three ways to manipulate the costs of delay in negotiation:
· Plan disruptive action.
· Form an alliance with outsiders.
· Manipulate the scheduling of negotiations.

Positions taken during negotiation

Effective distributive bargainers need to understand the process of taking a position during bargaining and the role of making concessions during the negotiation process.

· Opening offer. There are at least two reasons that an exaggerated opening offer is advantageous. First,it gives the negotiator room for movement and allow him or her time to learn about the other party’s prioeities. Second, an exxaggerated opening offer acts as a metamessage and may create. Two disadvantages of an exaggerated opening offer are 1) that it may be summarily rejected by the other party, and 2) that it communicates an attitude of toughness that may be haemful to long-term relationships.

· Opening stance. To communicate effectively, a negotiator should try to send a consistent message through both opening offer and stance.

· Initial concessions. It is important to note that the first concession conveys a message, frequently a symbolic one, to the other party about how you will peoceed.

· Role of concessions.
People enter negotiations expecting concessions. Good distributive bargainers will not begin negotiations with an opening offer too close to their own resistance point, but rather will ensure that there is enough room in the bargain range to make to make some concessions. Because concession making indicates an acknowledgment of the other party and a movement toward the other’s position, it implies a recognition of that position and it s legitimacy.

· Pattern of concession making
The pattern of concessions anegotiator makes contains valuable information, but it is not always easy to interpret. When successive concession get smaller, the most obvious message is that the concession maker’s position is getting firmer and that the resistance point is being approached.

· Final offer.
Eventually anegotiator wants to convey the message that there is no further room for improvement – that the present offer is the final one.

Commitment
Commitment is the taking of a bargaining position with some explicit or implicit pledge regarding the future course of action. The purpose of commitment is to remove ambiguity about the actor’s intended course of action. By making a commitment, a negotiator signals his or her intention to take this course of action, make this decision, or pursue this objective.

1. Tactical considerations in using commitments.
Commitments are two-edged. They may be used to gian the advantages or fix a negotiator to a particular position or point. Commitment exchange flexibility for certainty of action, but they create difficulties if you want to move to a new position.

2. Establishing a commitment.
A commitment statement has three properties: a high degree of finality, a high degree of specificity, and aclear statement of consequences. There are several ways to create a commitment :
· Public pronouncement.
· Linking with an outside base.
· Increase the prominence of demand.
· Reinforce the threat or promise.

3. Preventing the other party from committing prematurely.
All the advantages of a committed position work against a negotiator whrn the other party becomes committed. Therefore, a general strategy is to try to keep the other from becoming commited. One wa\y to prevent the other party from establishing a commited position is to deny him or her the necessary time.

4. Finding ways to abandon a committed position.
· Plan a way out.
· Let it die silently.
· Restate the commitment.
· Minimize the damage.

Closing the deal
There are several tactics available to negotiators for closing a deal; choosing the best tactic for a given negotiation is as much amatter of art as science.

· Provide alternatives. Negotiators can provide two or three alternative packages for the other party that are more or less equivalent in value.
· Assume the close. After having a general discussion about the needs and the positions of the buyer, often the seller will take out a large order form and start to complete it.
· Split the difference.The negotiator using this tactic will typically give a brief summary of the negotiation and suggest that, because things are so close, while this can be an effective closing tactic, it does presume that the parties started with fair opening offer.
· Exploding offers. An exploding offer contains an extremely tight deadline in order to pressure the other party to agree quickly.
· Sweeteners. Another closing tactic is to save a special concession for the close.

Handball tactics
Handball tactics are designed to pressure targeted parties to do somethings they would not otherwise do, and their presence usually disguises the user’s adherence to a decidedly distributive bargaining approach.
1. Dealing with typical hardball tactics. There are four main options that negotiators have for responding to typical hardball tactics:
· Ignore them
· Discuss them
· Respond in kind
· Co-opt the other party

2. Typical hardball tactics.
· Good cop/bad cop
· Lowball/highball
· Bogey
· The nibble
· Chicken
· Intimidation
· Aggressive behavior
· Snow job

Negotiation Chapter 2: Strategizing,Framing,and Planning

Chapter 2: Negotiation : Strategizing, Framing, and Planning

With effective planning and target setting, most negotiators can achieve their objectives; without them, results occur more by chance than by negotiator effort.

Goal – The objectives that dive a negotiation strategy Te first step in developing and executing a negotiation strategy is to determine one’s goal. Negotiators must anticipate what they want to achieve in a negotiation and prepare for these events in advance.

- Direct effects of goala on choice of strategy.
There are important four aspects of how goals affect negotiation to understand:
1. Wishes are not goal – a goal is a specific, focused, realistic target that one can specifically plan to achieve.
2. Our goal are often linked to the other party’s goal – Goal that are not linked to each other often lead the parties either to talk past each other or to intensify the conflict.
3. There are boundaries or limits to what our goals can be – goals must be reasonably attainable.
4. Effective goals must be concrete or specific, and preferably measurable.

- Indirct effects of goal on choice of strategy.
The pursuit of a singular, substantive goal often tends to support the choice of a competitive strategy.

Strategy – The overall plan to achieve one’s goals
Strategy refers to overall plan to accomplish one’s goals in a negotiation, and the action sequences that will lead to the accomplishment of those goals.
- Strategy, Tactics, or Planning?
Tactics are short-term, adaptiv moves designed to enact or pursue broad strategies,which in turn provide stability,continuity, and direction for tactical behaviors. Tactics are subordinate to strategy; they are structured, directed, and driven by strategic considerations. Planning is an integral part of the strategy process – the “action” component.

- Strategic option – Vehicles for achieing goals
A unilateral choice of strategy is one that is made without the active involvement of the other party.
1. Alternative situational strategies. Requiring the negotiator to determine the relative importance and priority of the two dimensions in the desired settlement.
2. Avoidance: The nonengagement strategy. There are many reasons why negotiators might choose not to negotiate. First, if one is able to meet one’s needs without negotiating at all. Second, is simply may not be worth the time and effort to negotiate. Third, the decision to negotiate is closely related to the desirability of available alternatives-the outcomes that can be achieveed if negotiations don’t work out.
3. Active-engagement strategies: Competition(win-lose bargaining), collaboration(win-win negotiation), and accommodation(win-lose strategy that involves an imbalance of outcomes.)

Defining the issues – the process of “framing” the problem
Framing is determining what issues are at stake. Framing is abour focusing, shaping, organizing the world around us. Frames emerge as the parties talk about their preferences and priorities; they allow the parties to begin to develop a shared or common definition of the issues related to a situation, and a process for resolving them.
Why frames are critical to understanding strategy. There is general agreement that people often use frames to define problems. Frames are inevitable; one cannot “avoid”framing. Frames can also be chaped by the type of information that is chosen, or the setting and context in which the information is presented.

Types of frames. There are different types of frames that parties use in disputes:
· Substantive – what the conflict is about.
· Outcome – what predispositions the party has toachieveing a specific result from negotiation.
· Aspiration – what predispositions the party has toward satisfying a broader set of interest or needs in negotiation.
· Conflict management process – how the parties will go about resolving their dispute.
· Identity – how the parties define “ who they are.”
· Characteristization – how the parties define the other parties.
· Loss-gain – how the parties view the risk associated with particular outcomes.

Another approach to frames: interests, rights, and power
· Interest – People are often concerned about what they need, desire, or want.
· Rights – People may also be concerned about who is “right” – that is , who has legitimacy, who is correct, or what is fair.
· Power – People may also wish to resolve a negotiation on the basis of power.
The frame of an issue changes as the negotiation evolves
The issue development approach focuses on the patterns of change that occur in the issues as parties communicate with each other. There are several factors shape a frames.First, the negotiation context cearly effects the way both sides define the issue. Second, frames can be shaped by the conversations that parties have with each other about the issues in the bargaining mix. At least four factors can effect how conversation is shaped:
· Negotiators tend to argue for stock issues. Or concerns that are raised every time the parties negotiate.
· Each party attempts to make the best possible case for his or her prefered position or perspective.
· In a more “macro” sense, frames may alxo define major shift and transitions in the overall negotiation.
· Finally,multiple agenda items operate to shape the issue development frames.

Reframing is dynamic process that may occur many times in conversation. It comes as parties challenge each other, as they present their own case or refute the other’s, or as they search for ways to reconcile seemingly incompatible perspectives.

Summary. There are three ways to understand frames: as catergories of experience; as interests, rights, and power; nad as a process of issue development. Understanding frames – which means understanding how parties define the key issues and how conversations can shift and transform those issues.

Understanding the flow of negotiations: stages and phases There are seven key steps to an ideal negotiation process:
Preparation: deciding what is important, defining goals, thinking ahead how to work together with the other party.
Relationship building: getting to know the other party , understanding how differences or similarity between you and the other, and building commitment toward achieving a mutually beneficial set of outcomes.
Information using: negotiators assenble the case they want to make for their preferd outcomes and settlement, one that maximize the negotiator’s own needs.
Bidding: the process of making moves from one’s initial, ideal position to actual outcome.
Closing the deal: to build commitment to the agreement achieved in the previous phrase.
Implementing the agreement: determining who needs to do what once the hands are shaken and the documents signed.

Getting ready to implement the strategy: the planning process The dominant force for success in negotiation is in the planning that takes place prior to the dialogue. Effective planning requires hard work on several fronts:

Defining the issues
Usually, anegotiation involves one or two major issues and several minor issues. In negotiation, a complete list of the issues at stake is best derived from the following sources: 1) an analysis of the overall situation,2) our own experience in similar situations..3) research conducted to gather information, 4) consultation with experts.

Assembling issues and defining the bargaining mix
After assembling issues on an agenda, the negotiator must prioritize them. Prioritization includes two steps:1) determine which issues are important and which are less important.,2) Determine whether the issues are connected or separate.

Defining interests. Interest may include:
- Substantive : directly related to the focal issues under negotiation.
- Process-based : related to the manner in which the negotiators settle the dispute.
- Relationship-based : tied to the current or desired future relationship between the parties.

Defining limits. Good prepararion requires that you establish two clear points: 1) limits - are the point where you decide that you should stop the negotiation rather than continue,because any settlement beyond this point us not minimally acceptable. 2) Alternatives – are other deals negotiators could achieve and still meet their needs.In any situation, the better your alternatives, the more power you have, because you can walk away from the deal in front of you and still know that you can have your needs and interests met.

Defining one’s onw objectives and opening bids. There are numerous ways to set a target. Targets may not be as firm and rigid as limits or alternatives; one might be able to set a general range, or a class of several outcomes that would that would be equally acceptable. Similarly, there are numerous ways to set an opening bid. An opening may be the best possible outcome, an ideal solution, something even better than was achieved last time.
- Target setting requires positive thinking about one’s own objectives.
- Target setting often requires considering how to package several issues and objectives.
- Target setting requires an understanding of trade-offs and throwaways.

Defining the constituent to whom one is accountable
Constineunts – bosses, parties who make the final decision, parties who will have and critique the sulution achieved. Moreover, there may be a number of observers to the negotiation who will also watch and critique the negotiation. Finally, negotiation occurs in a context – a social system of laws, customs, common business practices, natural norms, and political cross-pressures.

Understanding the other party and it’s interests and objective
There are several key pieces of background information that will be of great importance:
- The other party’s current resources, interests, and needs.
- The other party’s objectives.
- The other party’s reputation and negotiation style.
- The other party’s alternatives.
- The other party’s authority to make agreement.
- The other party’s likely strategy anf tactics.

Selecting a strategy. .the negotiator should clearly determine which strategy he/she intends to pursue.

Planning the issue presentation and defense – how will I present the issues to the other party.? One important aspest of actual negotiations is to present a case clearly and to marshal ample supporting facts and argument; another is to refute the other party’s agreements with counterargument.

Defining protocol – where and when the negotiation will occur, who will be there, agenda, etc. There are a number of elements of “protocol” or process that a negotiator should consider:
- Agenda. A negotiator may unilaterally draw up a firm list of issues, and even establish specific goals, well before the initial negotiation meeting. This process is valuable because it forces the bargainer to think through his or her position and decide on objectives.

- The location of negotiation. Negotiators tend to do better on their home turf – their own office, building, or city. If negotiators want to minimize in which advantage that comes with home sturf, then they need to select neutral territory in which neither party will have an advantage.Such as, held in conference rooms or hotel meeting room(Formal deliberations); held in restaurants, cocktail lounges, or room that offer an array of furniture(Informal deliberations).

- The time period of negotiation. If nrgotiatiators expect long, protracted seliberations, they might want to negotiate the time and duration of sessions.

- Other parties who might be involved in the negotiation.

- What might be done if negotiation fails.

- How will we keep track of what is agreed to?