Negotiation Strategies

Question 1

Hard (Distributive) Bargaining

Answer 1

Hard bargaining is a negotiation approach often used when there is a limited amount of resources or conflicting interests. In this strategy, parties aim to maximize their own gains while minimizing
concessions.

Question 2

Security point

Answer 2

Refers to the minimum a party is willing to accept in the negotiation.
Represents the bottom line, below which they are not willing to compromise

Question 3

Optimal outcome

Answer 3

maxium a party is able to obtain in the negotiation. It represents the ideal result for the parrty, which they strive to achieve.

Question 4

Bargaining space

Answer 4

also known as the Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA)
is the range between the security points of the parties.
It represents the area where negotiation can take place, and mutually beneficial agreement can be reached.

Question 5

ZOPA/ Volutnary exchange zone

Answer 5

Zone of Possible Agreement
The range between the security points of the parties within negotiations.
It represents the area where negotiation can take place and a mutually beneficial agreement can be reached.

Question 6

No overlap, no agreement

Answer 6

if the security points of the parties do not overlap within the bargaining space, it becomes challenging to reach an agreement.
Finding common ground and bridging the gap between the security points is crucial for succesful negotiations.

Question 7

Integrative bargaining

Answer 7

Integrative or Interest-based bargaining is a negotiation strategy in which all parties collaborate to find beneficial outcomes for each. The strategy focuses on finding a ‘win-win’

Question 8

Ways of integrative bargaining

Answer 8

• Reframing issue to find common ground
  –> collaborative problem-solving
• Exchanging information for reframing to be successful
• Creating value ( not the same as claiming value)

Question 9

Creating value

Answer 9

• previously hidden joint gains
• not focusing on dividing a fixed pie
• finding ways to fullfil all parties’needs and interests
• avoiding zero-sum

Question 10

Englightened self-interest

Answer 10

helping others to help oneself.

Question 11

Pro/cons Hard (distributive) bargaining

Answer 11

Risks:
* deteriorating relationships+ reputation
* risk of creating deadlocks
* ineffective to address deep-stated interests: impedes value creation

Pro:
* Effective to defend vital interests + essential principles

Question 12

Integrative bargaining –> collective problem-solving

Answer 12

Risks:
* creating unrealistic expectations
* time intensive

Pro:
* opens new perspectives: creates a new bargaining space
* improves deteriorated relationships
( looking through counterpart’s eyes)
* Effective for conflicts that deal with hard to quantify interests

Question 13

Negotiation Jujitsu (Fisher & Ury)

Answer 13

concept of redirecting te oppontens force, akin to martial art, to gain control and achieve a more constructive negotiation process.

Question 14

Negotiation Jujitsu 3 approaches

Answer 14

3 approaches to shift focus of counterparty:
1. changing game by concentrating on merits (verdiensten) oneself, rather of positional stances.
2. negotiation jujitsu –> counters the moves of positional bargaining + redirection of attention to merits
3. introducing third party as external mediation.
- can faciliate negotiation

Question 15

Common tactics of negotiation

Answer 15

• Tit-for-tat
• inviting unreciprocated offers
• Extreme claims + but small concessions
• commitment tactics
• Take-it-or-leave-it offers
• Trying o make you flinch (power play)
• personal insults + feather ruffling
• Bluffing, puffing, and lying (deception)
• Threats (and rewards)
• belittling alternatives
• Good/bad cop

Question 16

Modelling Strategic choices

Answer 16

Negotiation models based in game theory are an illustration of the real world.
Reveals the array of choices one actor has, as well s the independence of the outcome on the choices that both or all of the negotiation parties make.

Question 17

2 main types of negotiation games

Answer 17

1. Simultaneous games
2. Sequential games

Question 18

Simultaneous games

Answer 18

A game modelled so the player must make their decisions at the same time.

each actor must make a decision at the same time. → understanding of potential preferences of other side is extremely important,. This is why research and analysis became important parts of negotiation process: all parties work diligent to understand the incentives + disincentives (game pay-offs) of negotiation arena.

• Illustrating interdependence of choices, choices of other actors.

Question 19

Sequential games

Answer 19

A game modelled so that each player makes a decision at a different point in time. Action-reaction processes reveal the ways actors react to issues + how reactions lead to other reactions by even more actors on the international playfield. → Arms-race cycles : security dilemma

• reveal mounting complexities inherent in action-reaction of decision-making.
  Intention –> to get to the basic mechanisms of choice: explaining strategy.

main issue: decisions are always affected by possible decisions of the other one.

Question 20

Prisoners dilemma + Climate change (example)

Answer 20

Environmental issues: comparison= that each country in theory wished to promote global environmental quality, however, no country entirely trusts the involvement of the others, or wants to bear the cost of regulations.
→ many business interests oppose strict limits on carbon emissions due to the cost of production.
→ nobody wants to bear the cost of environmental regulation + in effect, choose to squeal on others by polluting.
→ collective squealing results in negative outcome.
So → distrusts brings this global issue to the prisoners’ dilemma.

Question 21

Chicken Game (2nd simultaneous game)
Game of survival, will + humiliation

Answer 21

2 drivers sit in cars facing each other half a mile away.
Someone of the side of the road swings a flashlight to signal both drivers to start driving towards eachother: as fast as possible.
Both drivers hope that the other will swerve off the road –> the chicken.
If neither swervers: cars both crash –> both killed. but they are both strong-willed: ‘‘winners’.
if one swerves: that one is a chicken, and the loser, even though that one spares both players live.

Question 22

Decision-tree mapping

Answer 22

Provides a way to understand the progression of choices emerging from an initial one.
→ evaluate in reverse direction. Method: ‘Look ahead + reason back’’- approach.

Question 23

Reciprocity

Answer 23

the practice by countries of making in-kind concessions to each other

Question 24

Competitive negotiation

Answer 24

rational approach to international negotiaiton is a competive one

Question 25

Positional bargaining

Answer 25

Negotiation stance, where an actor identifies only one desirable outcome and refuses to move away from it or consider any other options.

Question 26

Adversarial diplomacy

Answer 26

Negotiation stance where interest of 2 more countries clashes, but there is little or no chance of armed conflict.

The practice of adversarial diplomacy often involves significant threats of sanctions. Other tactics/ tools associated with this form of diplomacy range from imposing strict deadlines to threatening the cessation of diplomatic contact.

Question 27

Coersive diplomacy !!

Answer 27

Negotiation stance, involving the threat of force or limited use of force as a tool at the negotiation table.

Example: North Korea → military force can be used effectively to achieve foreign policy goals.

Question 28

Collaborative negotiation

Answer 28

when negotiatiors are able to identify common interests + use them as base for dialogue.

→ emphasize common ground while downplaying areas of contention.
Churchill: ‘to jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war’’

Question 29

3 alternative tools of competivie negotiator

Answer 29

• interest-based bargaining
• informal track-two diplomatic approaches
• injection of new insights through mediation

Question 30

interest-based bargaining

Answer 30

negotiating stance that focuses on trying to understand the needs of other party and finding areas of common interest

Question 31

Track- Two diplomacy

Answer 31

one of most innovative methods to build trust between actors is use of unoffical diplomacy. Informal negotiations allow parties ‘‘to come together more easily to explore mutual fears, grievances + demands’’

Question 32

Mediation

Answer 32

An outside perspective brought in to help ways to resolve a deadlocked conflict when parties desire progress, but cannot resolve issues themselves.

Question 33

3 tactics categorties of mediators

Answer 33

1. communication
2. formulation
3. manipulation

Question 34

Communication strategies

Answer 34

facilitative mediation
deal with perception that all parties are able to speak freely and to be heard by the other parties.

Question 35

Formulation of negotiation

Answer 35

Encouraging parties to deal with simple issues first, then work towards the more difficult and complicated ones.
→ identification of potential common interests + compromises, including secrecy of negotiations to protect the reputation of parties.

Question 36

Manipulation strategy

Answer 36

use of position to obtain agreeable outcome.
Mediator can take personal responsibility for concessions:the, becoming one being ‘’blamed’’.