Negotiations

Conflict Conflict occurs when parties disagree over substantive issues or when emotional antagonisms create friction Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Conflict Conflict occurs when substantive issues or when parties disagree over substantive issues or when emotional antagonisms create friction Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Substantive issues Goals Values Allocation of Resources Methods Ethics Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Substantive issues * patient care * administration Consider issues in health care * patient care * administration Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Emotional antagonisms Anger Mistrust Dislike Fear Resentment Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Emotional antagonisms Pride Invest emotion in a position win/lose save face support friends leverage by personality Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Emotional antagonisms Examples in health care political hierarchy Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Levels of Conflict Intrapersonal Interpersonal Intergroup Interorganization Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Types Horizontal Vertical Role Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Positive / Constructive Negative / Destructive Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Moderate is constructive Conflict Moderate is constructive Impact on Performance + - Low High Intensity Schermerhorn; Ch. 18

Stages Conflict antecedents

Stages Perceived conflict

Stages Felt conflict

Stages Manifest conflict = openly expressed in behavior

Environment of Conflict Participants Timing / Work cycles / Schedules Day of the week Hour of the day Preexisting stress levels

What is in the bag?

‘Getting to Yes’ Create Options What is the best way for people to deal with their differences? Create Options Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

Where do we find ’differences’? __________________ Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Problem” Don’t bargain over positions Examples provided Customer Shopkeeper Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Separate the people from the problem Every Negotiator has two kinds of interests: The Substance The Relationship Separate the relationship from the substance Tenant Landlady Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Perception Engage in ‘Face-saving’ Discuss perceptions Look for opportunities to act inconsistently with their perceptions Engage in ‘Face-saving’ Make sure your proposals are consistent with their values. Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Emotion Recognize emotions (all sides) Consider emotions legitimate and acknowledge Allow emotions to be displayed Don’t react to the emotions Use symbolic gestures Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Communication Engage in ‘Face-saving’ Use active listening Acknowledge what is said but do not use paraphrasing to restate their perception Restate their position positively Speak about yourself not them Speak for a purpose Engage in ‘Face-saving’ Make sure your proposals are consistent with their values. Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Focus on the Interests, Not Positions Ask ‘Why?’ and ‘Why Not?’ Consider the impact on my interests: Will I lose or gain political support? Will colleagues criticize or praise me? Impact on the group’s interests: What will be the short-term consequences? Long term? What will be the economic consequences? What will be the effect on outside supporters and public opinion? Will the precedent be good or bad? Will making this decision prevent doing something better? Is the action consistent with our principles? Ethical? Can I do it later if I want? Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Focus on the Interests, Not Positions The most powerful interests are basic human needs. __________________ Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Focus on the Interests, Not Positions Security The most powerful interests are basic human needs. Security Economic Well Being A Sense of Belonging Recognition Control Over One’s Life Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Invent Options for Mutual Gain Process: Not inventing is the norm Judgement hinders evaluation People often approach this by narrowing the options not broadening them. Develop a solution that also appeals to the self-interest of the other party Process: Separate inventing from deciding Add a brainstorming session Involve a facilitator Use the ‘Circle Chart’ Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

What might be done What is wrong In Theory In the real world Step III. Approaches Step II. Analysis Diagnose the problem Sort symptoms into categories Suggest causes Observe what is lacking Note barriers What are the possible strategies or prescriptions? What are some theoretical cures? Generate broad ideas about what might be done. In Theory Step I. Problem Step IV. Action Ideas What’s wrong? What are current symptoms? What are disliked facts contrasted with a preferred solution? What might be done? What specific steps might be taken to deal with the problem? In the real world Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

“The Method” Insist on Using Objective Criteria Developing Objective Criteria Fair Standards Fair Procedures Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

The Big What Ifs What if they are more powerful? Develop your BATNA Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

The Big What Ifs What if they won’t pay? Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991

The Big What Ifs What if they use dirty tricks? Fisher R, Ury W: Getting to Yes, 1991