An Introduction to Negotiation Chapter 1 An Introduction to Negotiation 1

Negotiation Negotiation = a way to beat an opponent WRONG! 1

Negotiation…. A means of resolving conflicts 1-2 A means of resolving conflicts An alternative to fighting, war Agreements can be made permanent through rules and laws Today a common means of resolving family, work, and societal disputes Yet, many people avoid, even fear negotiation. Why? Because they may lack the simple skills, techniques, and experience to prepare and succeed at negotiation. 1

What is negotiation? A process where one person is trying to get another to do or not do something for him/her 1

Negotiation Negotiation = 1. Process to pursue value involving other people 2. Journey of self-improvement 1

How Important a Skill Is Negotiation? 1-3 “Negotiation is the pre-eminent form of decision making in personal and professional life” -William Ury Getting Past No 1

Negotiation: important aspects Is everywhere Is a process Entails a relationship Various ways with their own risks and rewards To do or not do something has value for us 1

Basic assumptions to keep in mind Negotiation is everywhere You can try to negotiate everything Negotiation is a skill Negotiation is not a magic pill There is no “best” way to negotiate Strategy and implementation 1

Value Negotiation system Principled Negotiation (Win-Win) Delivers the most possible value at the least possible risk in the widest range of situations 1

Three Basic Types of Negotiation 1-5 1. Deal making: purchase of a new home or car 2. Decision making: parties in a zoning case 3. Dispute resolution: litigation over property rights While the three have subtle differences, all are forms of negotiation 1

Chapter Case: Zoning Change 1-6 Sophia is seeking a zoning change Robert, an inexperienced attorney, is hired by Sophia to represent her before the Zoning Commission Neighborhood residents oppose Sophia’s proposed new condo development The Zoning Commission staff suggest a meeting of all parties to negotiate their differences 1

The Five Elements Common to Negotiation Situations 1-7 1. Two or more parties (or interests) 2. Interdependence 3. Common goals 4. Flexibility 5. Decision-making ability 1

1- Parties and Their Interests 1-8 Parties can view a conflict situation differently That view, or frame, leads them to focus on some characteristics of the conflict and ignore others Relationship/task frame: Parties focus on either ongoing relationship or the subject matter of the dispute Emotional/intellectual frame: Parties pay attention to the emotional components of the dispute or behaviors of the parties Cooperate/win frame: Parties seeks to benefit both parties or to maximize personal gain 1

1/1 Developing Negotiating Skills 1-9 Negotiations are rarely pure win-lose or win-win propositions Negotiations take place under conditions of ambiguity and uncertainty Most negotiations involve existing or potential sources of conflict that impede reaching agreement 1

1/1 Developing Negotiating Skills 1-10 Negotiating progress comes in stops and starts. Most complex negotiations take place between agents of groups and not the groups themselves Complex negotiations often involve a team approach Negotiating skills can be learned 1

1/1 Developing Negotiating Skills 1-11 Negotiations are chaotic and seldom pass sequentially through distinct phases such as pre-negotiation, deal structuring, detailed bargaining, and agreement Negotiations involving multiple parties and complex issues challenge a negotiator Most negotiations are linked to other negotiations 1

1/2 Bargaining Styles: Dual Concern Model (assertiveness/cooperation) 1-12 Five bargaining styles 1. Avoiding 2. Accommodative 3. Collaborative 4. Competing 5. Compromising 1

Negotiators Styles Assertiveness Cooperativeness Forcing Assertive Unassertive Assertive Forcing Resolving conflicts by satisfying one’s own needs at the expense of another’s Collaborating Rewarding conflict by seeking an advantageous solution for all parties Compromising Resolving conflict by each party giving up something of value Accommodating Resolving conflicts by placing another’s needs and concerns above your own Avoiding Resolving conflicts by withdrawing from or suppressing them In dealing with conflict, it is important to first determine the intention of the other party. One’s handling will depend on the assertiveness or cooperatives of the other person. As you can see from this graph, the more unassertive and uncooperative the person is, the best way to handle the conflict is to avoid. Likewise, if the person is very assertive yet cooperative, the best handling style is collaborating. Uncooperative Cooperative Cooperativeness

5 ways to manage conflict Avoidance Competition (A) Accommodation (B) First, write A,B, C, D in a column on the board; tell students you want to know where their scores fell and would like them to raise their hands to show where their highest score occurred as you read out each letter. Total the number of hands raised on each and provide a number so all can see where styles are clustered. There are five ways of managing conflict, and each has its place. First, (and not measured on this questionnaire) is to manage conflict by avoiding it. And there are many instances when a manager might chose to avoid conflict. For example, if the conflict is a flare-up between volatile persons who will soon forget the conflict, there is no point for the manager to get involved. Similarly, if the conflict is unimportant it may also be prudent to avoid it. The point is, sometimes avoidance is a good policy. (Sometimes in my family life, I will avoid a conflict if it appears that my spouse is tired or grouchy, for example.) Often conflict cannot be avoided at which point we engage. Most people tend to have a preferred style of conflict management, and those are the preferences you showed by scoring highest on A, or B or C or D. So we see that in this class, we have many people who are (fill in the blank).

5 ways to manage conflict Compromise (C) Collaboration (D) First, write A,B, C, D in a column on the board; tell students you want to know where their scores fell and would like them to raise their hands to show where their highest score occurred as you read out each letter. Total the number of hands raised on each and provide a number so all can see where styles are clustered. There are five ways of managing conflict, and each has its place. First, (and not measured on this questionnaire) is to manage conflict by avoiding it. And there are many instances when a manager might chose to avoid conflict. For example, if the conflict is a flare-up between volatile persons who will soon forget the conflict, there is no point for the manager to get involved. Similarly, if the conflict is unimportant it may also be prudent to avoid it. The point is, sometimes avoidance is a good policy. (Sometimes in my family life, I will avoid a conflict if it appears that my spouse is tired or grouchy, for example.) Often conflict cannot be avoided at which point we engage. Most people tend to have a preferred style of conflict management, and those are the preferences you showed by scoring highest on A, or B or C or D. So we see that in this class, we have many people who are (fill in the blank).

Negotiation Continuum I win, you lose (competition—A) I lose or give in (accommodate—B) We both get something (compromise—C) We both “win”(collaborate—D) A B C D First, let’s think about conflict as it unfolds for you. Think about one example (personal or professional) of when you used a particular style and tell us how that position worked for you. Here are pluses and minuses for each style:

Competition Plus The winner is clear Winners usually experience gains Minus Establishes the battleground for the next conflict. May cause worthy competitors to withdraw. Ask students to volunteer examples here.

Curtails conflict situation. Enhances ego of the other. Minus Accommodation Plus Curtails conflict situation. Enhances ego of the other. Minus Sometimes establishes a precedence. Does not fully engage participants. Ask students to volunteer examples he precedence

Establishes friendship. Minus No one gets what they want. Compromise Plus Shows good will. Establishes friendship. Minus No one gets what they want. May feel like a dead end. Ask students to volunteer examples here.

Collaboration Plus Everyone “wins”. Creates good feelings. Minus Hard to achieve since no one knows how. Often confusing since players can “win” something they didn’t know they wanted. Ask students to volunteer examples here.

2/1 Attributes of Bargaining Styles Conflict style Strong predisposition As a positive attribute As a negative attribute Weak predisposition As a strategy Avoiding Defers confrontational negotiation Displays tact and diplomacy Causes stalemates Prefers hard-nosed bargaining When not interested in negotiating Accommodating Derives satisfaction from solving problems Good team builder May make unwise concessions Has little patience for other party’s needs When hostilities need to be lessened Competing Views negotiation as a game or sport to win Excellent instincts for claiming value Focus on issues that are easy to define win-loss Believes in treating people fair and avoiding needless conflict When substantive interests are important but not the relationship Collaboration Enjoys participating in joint problem solving Instinctively tries to discover and satisfy the real interests of the parties May transform a simple problem into a complex one No patience for the give and take that comes with collaborative thinking Used when relationship and the substantive outcomes are important Compromising Eager to conclude negotiation on fair standards Best when stakes are small and time is short Can rush the process and agree to unnecessary concessions Refuses to compromise on principle Used when stakes are small, time is short, or in a weak bargaining position 1

SKILLED NEGOTIATORS AVERAGE NEGOTIATORS Anticipated twice as many long-term common areas Anticipated half as many long-term areas Developed upper and lower limits for possible settlement points Planned goals around fixed settlement points Flexible on the order of issues to discuss Addressed issues in a predetermined order Used neutral phrases when proposing offers Used judgmental phrases when proposing offers 1

SKILLED NEGOTIATORS AVERAGE NEGOTIATORS Considered a wide range of outcomes or options Considered a narrow range of outcomes or options Gave over three times as much attention to common ground areas Considered a third less common ground areas Anticipated twice as many long-term common areas Anticipated half as many long-term areas Developed upper and lower limits for possible settlement points Planned goals around fixed settlement points Flexible on the order of issues to discuss Addressed issues in a predetermined order Used neutral phrases when proposing offers Used judgmental phrases when proposing offers 1

Open-ended: “What were you hoping to settle today?” ½ Tactics for Success: Find Common Interests by Asking the Right Questions! 1-17 Open-ended: “What were you hoping to settle today?” Leading: “Don’t you think this proposal meets one of your goals?” Clarifying: “Can you postpone collecting that fee until next year?” Gauging: “How important to you is the 24-hour service guarantee?” Seek agreement: “If we agree to your delivery terms do we have a deal?” 1

2- Interdependency 1-18 Without interdependency no reason to negotiate, no motivation to reach agreement Degrees of interdependency include: one-shot negotiation, repeat transactions, or long-term relationship 1

The two most important types of goals 3- Common Goals 1-19 The two most important types of goals 1. Content: the substance or specifics 2. Relationship: how the parties want to be viewed by each other 1

Prospective: initial objective 3/1 Other Types of Goals 1-20 Prospective: initial objective Transactional: objectives that arise during negotiations Retrospective: objectives that arise after negotiations are complete Collaborative: mutual objectives 1

4- Flexibility 1-21 A power shift can quickly occur in a negotiation situation. A negotiator must be able to respond in a strategic way. 1

5- Decision-Making Ability 1-22 Negotiation involves at least two people making decisions that require judgments and choices Judgment involves recognizing and evaluating the content of the options presented Choice involves actually selecting an option 1

5- Decision-Making Ability 1-23 Parties often differ in how they think or process information People develop schema as a way of organizing current knowledge and as a way to process future information Some schemas create biases 1

Biases That May Affect a Negotiator 1-24 Availability bias: An outcome probability is based on how easy it is to imagine Representativeness bias: Stereotyping Self-serving bias: Belief that an option is true because it benefits them Self-enhancement bias: Belief that one’s own behavior is more constructive Impact bias: One overestimates the positive/negative satisfaction of an outcome 1

Multiparty Negotiations (three or more parties or interests) 1-25 Usually present significantly different challenges and negotiation techniques: 1. Coalitions form to control the outcome 2. Trade-offs can occur with one or more 3. Majority rule may ignore interests of minority parties 4. Consensus does not mean all parties agree on all issues, but on the whole 5. Communication is more difficult due to the number of people and messages required 1

Negotiation Myths and Facts* 1-26 Facts 1. Good negotiators make concessions 2. Good negotiators never lie 3. Good negotiators look for common interests 4. Everyone is a negotiator Myths 1. Good negotiators are born 2. Experience is a great teacher 3. Good negotiators take risks 4. Good negotiators rely on intuition 1