Ethics in Negotiation

Why Do Ethics Apply to Negotiation?  “Ethics are broadly applied social standards for what is right or wrong in a particular situation or a process for setting those standards” –Not morals: individual and personal beliefs about right and wrong

Standards for Evaluating Strategies and Tactics Make decision based on:  Expected results, what would give the greatest return on investment –End-result ethics  What the law says, the legality –Rule ethics  Strategy and values of my organization –Social contract ethics  My own person convictions and what my conscience told me to do –Personalistic ethics

Types of Deceptive Tactics  Misrepresent one’s position to another party –Lie about preferred settlement or resistance point  Bluffing –Say will do something they don’t intend to do.  Falsification –Factually erroneous information. (fraud)  Deception –Collection of true and/or untrue arguments that leads the other to wrong conclusion. (fraud)  Selective disclosure or misrepresentation to constituencies –Not accurately tell what has transpired. Omission.

SINS Scale  Traditional competitive bargaining  Manipulation of opponent’s network  False promises  Misrepresentation of information  Inappropriate information gathering

Bluffing, Lying, & Deception  Excuses people use to justify –Tactic was unavoidable –Tactic was harmless –Tactic will help avoid negative consequences –Tactic will produce good consequences, or altruistically motivated. –They had it coming –They were going to do it, so I did it first –Tactic is fair or appropriate to situation

Consequences of Unethical Tactics  Impact of tactic. Does it work? –Rewards vs. punishments  Feedback and reaction from other negotiator, constituencies, and audiences –Anger, retaliation, revenge –Short term success, create an adversary  Evaluate own use of tactic— discomfort, personal stress, guilt vs. no problem using tactic again.

Detecting Deception  Intimidation  Futility portrayal  Discomfort and relief  Bluffing  Gentle prods  Minimization  Contradiction  Altered information  A chink in the defense  Self-disclosure  Point of deception cues  Concern  Keeping the status quo  Direct approach  Silence

Dealing with Deception  Ask probing questions –Uncovers acts of omission at least –Most buyers do not ask enough questions  Recognize the tactic –Ignore the tactic –Call the tactic –Respond in kind –Discuss what you see and offer to help the other party change to more honest behaviors –“You wish…”