N12: Best practices in negotiations

 

 

            Negotiation is an integral part of daily life and the opportunities to negotiate surround us. In this final chapter we reflect on negotiation at a broad level by providing 10 best practices for negotiators who wish to continue to improve their negotiation skills. Ten best practices for negotiators are as follow:
            1. Be prepared: Good preparation means setting aspirations for negotiation that are high but achievable.
            2. Diagnose the fundamental structure of the negotiation: a distributive negotiation, an integrative negotiation, or a blend of the two.
            3. Identify and work the BATNA: three things should be done with respect to other negotiator’s BATNA monitor carefully, remind other negotiator’s advantages, and suggest other negotiator.
            4. Be willing to walk away: Willing to walk away from a negotiation when no agreement is better than a poor agreement.

            5. Master paradoxes: the best way to manage paradox is to achieve a balance between the opposing forces.
            6. Remember the intangibles: intangibles frequently affect negotiation in a negative way.
            7. Actively manage coalitions: three types of coalitions and their potential effects coalitions against you, coalitions that support you, and loose, undefined coalition that may materialize either for or against you.
            8. Savor and protect your reputation: Reputation is fragile, important to build, easy to break and very hare to rebuild once broken.
            9. Remember that rationality and fairness are relative.
            10. Continue to learn from the experience: the best negotiator should analyze each negotiation after it has concluded, to review what happened and what they learned.

 

            Negotiation epitomizes lifelong learning. Three steps to process: Plan a personal reflection time after each negotiation, Periodically take a lesson from a trainer or coach, and Keep a personal diary on strengths and weaknesses and develop a plan to work on weaknesses.

 

Question

1. What is the purpose of negotiation?

            Any method of negotiation may be fairly judged by three criteria: It should produce a wise agreement if agreement is possible. It should be efficient. And it should improve or at least not damage the relationship between the parties. (A wise agreement can be defined as one that meets the legitimate interests of each side to the extent possible, resolves conflicting interests fairly, is durable, and takes community interests into account).

 

2. What strategies or techniques are used to solve the problem or address the issue?

            The article lists Ten Best practices for Negotiators.

 

3. What the key paradoxes of negotiation?

            - Claiming value versus creating value

            - Sticking by your principles versus being resilient to the flow

            - Sticking with the strategy versus opportunistic pursuit of new options

            - Facing the dilemma of honesty: honest and open versus closed and opaque

            - Facing the dilemma of trust:  trust versus distrust

 

 

 

N11: International and cross-cultural negotiation

 

 

            This chapter is organized in the following manner. First we discuss the art and science of cross-cultural negotiation. Next, we consider some of the factors that make international negotiation different, including both the environmental context and the immediate context. We discussion of the most frequently studied aspect of international negotiation: the effect of culture is it national, regional, or organizational.

 

            The chapter concludes with a discussion of culturally responsive strategies available to the international negotiator. Understanding the role of factors in both the environmental and immediate contexts is important to grasping the complexity of international negotiation processes and outcomes.

 

            Robert Janosik suggests that researchers and practitioners of negotiation use culture in at least four different ways: 1. Culture as learned behavior, 2. Culture as shared values, 3. Culture as dialectics, and 4. Culture in context. From the managerial perspective, there are 10 ways that culture can influence negotiation: 1. The definition of negotiation, 2. The negotiation opportunity, 3. The selection of negotiators, 4. Protocol, 5. Communication,    6. Time sensitivity, 7. Risk propensity, 8. Groups versus individuals, 9. The nature of agreements, and 10. Emotionalism.

 

            Some of these strategies may be used individually, whereas others are used jointly with the other negotiator. Weiss indicates that one critical aspect of choosing the correct strategy for a given negotiation is the degree of familiarity (low, moderate, or high) that a negotiator has with the other culture.

 

Question

1. Describe the Cross cultural negotiation?

            Cross cultural negotiation is one of many specialized areas within the wider field of cross cultural communications. By taking cross cultural negotiation training, negotiators and sales personnel give themselves an advantage over competitors.

            There is an argument that proposes that culture is inconsequential to cross cultural negotiation. It maintains that as long as a proposal is financially attractive it will succeed.

 

2. What the Conceptualizing Culture and Negotiation?

Concept of culture:

            1. Culture is a group-level phenomenon a defined group of people shares beliefs, values, and behavioral expectations.

            2. Cultural beliefs, values, and behavioral expectations are learned and passed on to new members of the group.

 

3. What the Factors that makes International Negotiation Different?

(a) Environmental context

            - Political and legal pluralism

            - International economics

            - Foreign governments and bureaucracies

            - Instability

            - Ideology

            - Culture

            - External Stakeholders

 

(b) Immediate Context

            - Relative bargaining power (not just investment)

            - Levels of conflict

            - Relationships between negotiators

            - Desired Outcomes

            - Immediate Stakeholders

N10: Multiple Parties and Team

 

 

            The purpose of this chapter is to understand how the negotiation process changes when there are more than two parties at the table simultaneously. Most of what has been addressed in earlier chapters assumed a “one-on-one” negotiation situation. In this chapter, we examine how dynamics change when groups, teams, and task forces have to present individual views and come to a collective agreement about a problem, plan, or future course of action.

 

            We define a multiparty negotiation as one in which more than two parties are working together to achieve a collective objective. We show the ways that multiparty negotiation are complex and highly susceptible to breakdown and show that managing them effectively requires a conscious commitment from the parties and a facilitators as they work toward an effective multiparty agreement.

 

            Effective groups and their members do the following things: test assumptions and inferences, Share as much relevant information as possible, focus on interests, explain the reasons, be specific-use examples, keep the discussion focused, make decisions by consensus, and conduct a self-critique.

 

            There are three key stages that characterize multilateral negotiations: the renegotiation stage, this stage is characterized by a great deal of informal contact among the parties. The parties tend to work on a number of important issues. The formal negotiation stage, much of the multiparty negotiation process is a combination of the group discussion bilateral negotiation, and coalition-building activities described earlier in this volume. The third and final stage in managing multiparty negotiations is the agreement stage. The parties must select the best solution, develop an action plan, implement the action plan, and evaluate outcomes and the process.

 

Question

1.  Defined of Multiple-Party?

            Multiple-Party is consisting of three or more political parties with no single party having a majority (the multiple-party system prevailing in some European countries).

 

2. Who do you manage problem team members?

            - Be specific about problem behaviors

            - Describe problem as team problem (“we vs. you”)

            - Focus on behaviors the other can control

            - Wait to give constructive criticism

            - Keep feedback professional

            - Verify that the other has heard and understood

 

3. What’s the difference between multiparty negotiations?

            The differences between two-party and multiparty negotiations:

            - Number of parties

            - Informational and computational complexity

            - Social complexity

            - Procedural complexity

            - Strategic complexity

 

 

N09: Relationships in Negotiation

 

 

            This chapter identifies several issues that make negotiating in relationship different from and more challenging than conducting either distributive or integrative negotiations between parties who have no past or intended future relationship. “Relationship” is the meaning assigned by two or more individuals to their connectedness or coexistence.

 

            Key Elements in Managing Negotiations within Relationships: Reputation, Trust, and Justice are three elements that become more critical and pronounced when they occur within a negotiation.
            1. Reputation is a perceptual identity, reflective of the combination of salient personal characteristics and accomplishments, demonstrated behavior and intended images preserved over time, as observed directly and/or as reported from secondary sources.

            2. Trust Daniel McAllister defined the word trust as an individual’s belief in and willingness to act on the words, actions and decisions of another.

            3. Justice Individuals in organizations often debate whether their pay is fair, whether they are being fairly treated, or whether the organization might be treating some group of people in an unfair manner.

 

            This chapter we evaluated the status of previous negotiation research which has focused almost exclusively on market-exchange relationships and evaluated its status for different types of relationship, particularly communal-sharing and authority-ranking relationships.

 

Question

1. Why Is Relationship Important In Negotiation?

            When you have been doing business for a long time with someone, the relationship can be very important: it can have an impact on the price, how quickly you get delivery, what sort of quality of goods you receive. Relationship is also important in negotiating within your family. You will be related to your parents/siblings/cousins for a long time. When you want them to do something or to stop doing something you need to figure out whether that issue is more important than the long-term relationship.

 

 

2. What the Three things that contributes to trust?

            1. Individual’s chronic disposition toward trust

            2. Situation factors

            3. History of the relationship between the parties

 

3. Defined Elements of Negotiation – Relationships?

            Too often, people believe that negotiation is all about doing the deal and nothing else that a negotiation is successfully completed once we have made an agreement, and/or signed a contract to formalize that agreement. However, the deal is never done unless we establish and preserve the working relationships needed to perform the agreement.

 

            Unfortunately, too many negotiators consider that a signed contract or formal agreement represents the consummation of the deal which cannot be further from the truth the deal is not just the contract, it also extends to the working relationship that embodies and is committed to carrying out the agreed contractual terms. Many people are often tempted to use all means at their disposal (including power, force, deceit etc) to obtain easy, short term gains at a cost to the other party (and long term relationships) this follows the win/lose mindset of positional or distributional bargaining with its focus upon claiming value.

N08: Ethics in Negotiation

 

 

            Ethics are broadly applied social standards for what is right or wrong in a particular situation, or a process for setting those standards, they differ from morals, which are individual and personal beliefs about what is right and wrong. Ethics grow out of particular philosophies.

 

            The dictionary definition of ethics is: "a system of moral principles or values; the rules or standards governing the conduct of the members of a profession; accepted principles of right or wrong." Ethics establish the means of doing what is right, fair and honest.

            When we view negotiation from this perspective, we can see how important it is to improve our ability to negotiate so we can be more successful in achieving our goals. What we want to ensure is that when we do negotiate, we do so in a way that will ensure a win-win outcome--one that meets the needs and goals of both counterparts, and makes both of them willing to come back to the bargaining table to negotiate with each other again at a later time.

 

            Four approaches to Ethical Reasoning
            1. End-result ethics – Rightness of an action is determined by considering consequences.
            2. Duty ethics – Rightness of an action is determined by considering obligations to apply universal standards and principles.
            3. Social contract ethics – Rightness of and action is determined by the customs and norms of a community.
            4. Personality ethics – Rightness of an action is determined by one’s conscience.

 

            In a negotiation, whenever you are ethical and honest even though it costs you something, you gain points. If a counterpart makes an invoice error that is to your advantage and you inform him of it, that costs you something--but it also earns you respect. A client recently called to inform us that we had not sent an invoice for services we had performed for her. That one telephone call let us know that this client is honest.

 

 

Question

1. 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 together.

            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 law 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) personality ethics: in that the rightness of an action is based on one’s own conscience and moral standards.

 

2. 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.

 

3. How can negotiators deal with the other party’s use of deception?
            (a) 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.
            (b) 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.

 

N07: Finding and using Negotiation Power

 

            Power is the potential to have influence over another party during negotiations. However, power can also be used to level the playing field and create collaborative negotiations and solutions. Power may be sought to compete with or dominate another party or it may be used to minimize the other parties potential to take advantage of the situation. Sources of power vary and include informational, personality-based, position-based, relationship-based, and contextual power.

 

            The party with the most information may have power over the competitor: in common terms, knowledge is power. Personality-based sources of power include charisma but also psychological or cognitive skills. Some parties may rely on position-based power, or reverting to rank in negotiations. Relationship-based power depends on persons connections, and contextual power offers one party the advantage in a given situation such as being in familiar surroundings.

 

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

 

Question

1. How people acquire 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.

 

            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:

            (a) 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.
           

            (b) The location within an organizational structure: Which leads to either formal authority or informal power based on where one is located relatives to flows of information or resources?

 

2. 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 party in increase the probability of securing desired outcome.

 

3. What is the role of receivers?
            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 accurately), 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 a negotiated agreement (BATNA), make a public commitment (or get the other party to make one), and inoculate yourself against the other’s persuasive message.

 

 

N06: Communication

 

Communication in Negotiation Communication processes, both verbal and nonverbal, are critical to achieving negotiation goals and to resolving conflicts. Negotiation is a process of interaction Negotiation is a context for communication subtleties that influence processes and outcomes.

 

Verbal Communication:
            Communication varies according to the formality of the negotiation situation. As the rules and procedures of negotiation, become increasingly detailed and specific, the impact of communication becomes less significant. In negotiation, language operations at two levels: the logical level (for proposals or offers) and the pragmatic level (semantics, syntax, and style). The meaning conveyed by a proposition or statement is a combination of one logical surface message and several pragmatic messages.

 

Nonverbal Communication:
            Nonverbal communication, or body language, is a vital form of communication. When we interact with others, we continuously give and receive countless wordless signals. All of our nonverbal behaviors-the gestures we make, the way we look, listen, move, and react tell the other person whether or not. The nonverbal signal we send either produce a sense of interest, trust, and desire for connection-or they generate disinterest, distrust, and confusion.

 

Relevant to understanding negotiations:

            They first addressed what is communicated during negotiation. Rather than simply being an exchange of preferences about solutions, negotiation covers a wide ranging 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.

 

Question

1. Communication functions to?

1. Coordinate outcomes.

2. Exchange information, intentionally and unintentionally; overtly and covertly.

3. Express strategic intentions and tactical actions.

4. Identify patterns of behavior.

5. Alters perceptions and expectations concerning the bargaining situation, relationship, process, and outcomes.

 

2. Explain what is communicated during negotiation?

1. Offers and counteroffers – Bargainers have definite preferences and exhibit rational behavior by acting in accordance with those preferences. A communicative 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 a counteroffers; another important 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.

 

3. What’s about “Active listening”?

Receivers restate or paraphrase the sender’s message in their own language.

Three ways of looking at Active Listening

(1) Set of skills (e.g. open-ended questions)

 

(2) Ability to focus/concentrate - focused on all aspects of speaker’s communication, setting aside my own issues for the moment.

 

 (3) Attitudes (ideally):

- I care what this person has to say

- I’m sincerely curious about how this person sees things

- I’m willing to withhold judgment and accept this person’s reactions, perceptions, feelings as legitimate.

- Active Listening Skills

- Get the Story

- Probe / Clarify Meanings

- Listen for Emotions

- Summarize

- Value Silence

 

 

N05: Perception, cognition, and Communication

 

 

Perception, cognition, and communication are fundamental processes that govern how individuals construct and interpret the interaction that takes place in a negotiation. Reduced to its essence, negotiation is a form of interpersonal communication, which itself is a subject of the broader category of human perception and communication.

 

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.

 

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. Framing is about focusing, shaping, and organizing the world around us--making sense of complex realities and defining it in ways that are meaningful to us.

 

An important aspect of framing is the cognitive heuristics approach, which examines the ways in which negotiators make systematic errors in judgment when they process information.

 

The cognitive heuristic approach to framing focuses on how a party perceives and shapes the outcome (particularly with regard to risk), and how the party's frame tends to persist regardless of the events and information that follow it.

 

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.

 

            The chapter 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.

 

Question

1. What is the definition of perception? Think of it as the process of becoming aware of the world around you through your senses.

Your senses play a critical role in perception and behavior. They not only allow you to perceive your environment, they also enable you to act in response to it.

 

            Sensation and perception psychology is one of the oldest fields of study in social psychology. Below I'm going to take you through the process we go through to become aware of anything in our environments.

 

2. Why are Frames Important?

An essential element in conflict resolution is an understanding of how frames affect conflict development. In the context of a conflict, we create frames to help us understand why the conflict exists, what actions are important to the conflict, why the parties act as they do, and how we should act in response. During the evolution of a conflict, frames act as sieves through which information is gathered and analyzed, positions are determined (including priorities, means, and solutions), and action plans developed. Depending on the context, framing may be used to conceptualize and interpret, or to manipulate and convince.

 

3. How do you use emotion strategically in a negotiation?

As mentioned above, Fisher and Shapiro cogently argue for the use of the five core concerns as levers to create and enhance positive emotions in order to achieve a better negotiated outcome. Recent research has shown that both emotion and mood can have an effect on the behavior of the negotiator experiencing them, on the other party perceiving them, on the relationship between the parties, and on the negotiated outcome. However, the strategic use of emotion raises significant ethical issues.

N04: Negotiation: Strategy and Planning

 

 

Business negotiations should always start with a plan. Planning and preparation will help lead you to success. Before you choose any negotiation tactics or specifics, you must start with your negotiation strategy. Planning your negotiation strategy should always come before selecting negotiating tactics. Your negotiation strategy serves as the foundation for the approach and techniques that you use to achieve your goals.

 

In any kind of negotiation the planning stage is probably the most important. Too often we go in badly prepared and end up giving concessions that reduce the overall profitability of the final deal. The importance of planning is in having a very clear idea before entering into the negotiation.

 

            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 be 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 will 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 precede. This sense of direction, and the confidence derived from it, is a very important factor in affecting negotiating outcomes.

Question

1. How to do when you know you have a negotiation coming up?

You should do a lot of planning before you meet the other party. Part of this planning is to establish a clear idea of what you want to achieve. Research the other party it is critical in negotiation to know who you are dealing with. If you don't know anything about the other party you are at a severe disadvantage.

 

You should at least know these details about the other party:

- Who you will be dealing with?

- Their track record.

- How badly they need what you have to offer?

- What alternative parties are accessible to them?

- The major strategy they are expected to use.

- Their likely opening demands.

- Their strengths and weaknesses.

 

2. What’s “The Dual Concern Model”?

The Dual Concern Model assumes that parties’ preferred method of handling conflict is based on two underlying dimensions: assertiveness and empathy. The assertiveness dimension focuses on the degree to which one is concerned with satisfying one’s own needs and interests. Conversely, the empathy (or cooperativeness) dimension focuses on the extent to which one is concerned with satisfying the needs and interests of the other party. The intersection points of these dimensions land us in different conflict styles. It’s always helpful not only to realize your own conflict style, but to appreciate the style that your opposite number is using.

 

3. Explain Active-Engagement Strategies?

1. Collaboration – integrative bargaining, win-win (I win, you win)

Integrative bargaining is about searching for common solutions to problems that are not exclusively of interest to only one of the negotiators. Positive sum situations are those where each party gains without a corresponding loss for the other party. The law of win-win says “Let’s not do it your way or my way; let’s do it the best way”

 

2. Competition – distributive bargaining, win-lose (I win, you lose)

Distributive bargaining refers to the process of dividing or distributing scarce resources

            - Two parties have different but interdependent goals

            - There is a clear conflict of interests

 

3. Accommodation – involves an imbalance of out comes (I lose, you win)

The negotiator wants to let the other win, keep the other happy, or not to endanger the relationship by pushing hard to achieve some goal no the substantive issues.

 

            Accommodation is often used;

            - When the primary goal of the exchange is to build or strengthen the relationship and the negotiator is willing to sacrifice the outcome.

            - If the negotiator expects the relationship to extend past a single negotiation episode.

N03: Strategy and Tactics of Integrative Negotiation

 

 

When a negotiation is integrative, it means that negotiation is based on interest or otherwise negotiation strategy which lay emphasis on win-win situation. The goal of Integrative Negotiation is to make the parties’ interest compatible, so that both sides can win. That is, reach an agreement that satisfies their need. The goals of the parties are integrative. Negotiations are not mutually exclusive. If one party achieves its goals, the other is not precluded from achieving its goals as well. The fundamental structure of integrative negotiation situation is such that, it allows both sides to achieve their objective.

 

            While Integrative Negotiation Strategies are preferable, they are not always possible. Sometimes parties’ interests really are opposed as when both sides want a larger share of fixed resources.

 

            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.

 

Past experience, based perceptions and truly distributive aspects of bargaining makes it remarkable that integrative agreements occur at all. But they do, largely because negotiators work hard to overcome inhibiting factors and search assertively for common ground. Those wishing to achieve integrative results find that they must manage both the contest and the process of negotiation in order to gain the cooperation and commitment of all parties. Key contextual factors include:

- Creating a free flow of information

- Attempting to understand the other negotiator’s real need and objective

- Emphasizing the commonalties between the parties and minimizing the differences

- Searching for solutions that meet the needs and objectives of both sides.

 

Key Steps in Integrative Negotiation Process:

a. Identify and define the problem

b. Understand the problem and bring interests and needs to the surface

c. Generate alternative solution to the problems

 

            We have stressed that successful Integrative Negotiation can occur if the parties are predisposed to finding a mutually acceptable joint solution. Many other factors contribute to a predisposition toward problem solving and a willingness to work together to find the best solution.

 

Question

1. How to communicate “firm flexibility” if no guarantee of finding a win-win solution?

- Use contentious tactics to establish firmness about basic interests

- Signal flexibility and concern for their interests

- Indicate willingness to change proposals if it helps bridge the gap in interests

- Demonstrate problem-solving capacity

- Maintain open communications

- Reaffirm what’s important or fundamental

- Reconsider aspects of your interests that are clearly unacceptable to them are they really essential

 

2. Why Integrative Negotiation Is Difficult to Achieve?

• The history of the relationship between the parties

– If contentious in past, it is difficult not to look at negotiations as win-lose

• The belief that an issue can only be resolved distributive

– Negotiators are biased to avoid behaviors necessary for integrative negotiation

• The mixed-motive nature of most negotiating situations

– Purely integrative or purely distributive situations are rare

• The conflict over the distributive issues tends to drive out cooperation, trust needed for finding integrative solutions

 

 

3. What some of the main tactics used in integrative negotiation?

1. Send a message about the intention to cooperate: to send a clear message to the other party of our intention to cooperate, to solve the problem, to be flexible, for example, to let you know that we both face the same problem, by showing concern for their interests, to show willingness to dialogue.

2. Create a climate of problem solving: a climate of problem solving, unlike what happens in a distributive bargaining where it often creates a climate of competition and belligerence.

3. Ensure good communication: to create conditions for good communication, maintain open communication channels.

4. Find differences: it is through the differences (whether in needs, preferences, tastes, values, interests, resources, skills, etc.) That can create value, for example, to identify something that is not as valuable to one but for the other party itself, and exchange it for something that the other party is not so valuable, but for one another.