S5 - Power in Negotiations Flashcards
power as force
Power as a force is the most classical way of looking at power.
It is narrow, because it equates cause with ultimate expression.
What gives you power is the use of violence (violence as cause) and the way you express power is also through force.
Force is not necessarily used and it denies any other form of power.
Dependent on economy, because you cannot have a strong army without any economic power.
It is ideological, the emphasis is on violence and justifying the use of violence
use of violence / way you express power. Depends on ecconomy & ideology
four ways of looking at power
power as force
power as possession
power as ability
power as (purposeful) action
power as possession
more neorealist.
Power as resource based (indicators / source). It has material indicators: wealth, military assets.
There are also immaterial indicators: religious power, charisma.
In general some of these forms of power can be aggregated for the total amount of power. It is however difficult to observe and analyse.
There is no differentiation between will and skill and between determination and capabilities.
Also static way of looking at power, because a particular actor has an amount of power at a particular time
(im)material power. Can be aggragated but is static.
power as ability
Power is the ability of one party to move another in an intended direction (influence). So to force a party to do something that they did not want to do. It is related to payoffs.
Focus on social power (relations between parties) and the net power.
Net power is not the same as the applied power. Net power is kind of what is over from the applied power minus the resistance power.
One problem is that if one party prevails, does that mean that the other party had no power? Also, what about resistance to power, is that power as well?
ability to move another state (influence). Social power & Net power
power as (purposeful) action
Power is an action by one party intended to produce movement by another.
Potential forms are pressure (negative - stick), inducement (positive - carrot) and resistance.
It is useful in conflict management: parties (including third parties) in a conflict try to influence the behaviour of the other side.
It derives from the fact that disputing sides need each other in finding solutions to their problems.
action intended to move another party. sticks and carrots.
If power is defined as purposeful action towards
producing desired outcomes, then…
Power observed through resources does not always produce expected behavior
Power is context based
At the “nexus of will (interests and resources) and skill
(ability to translate the resources into a desired outcome)
power in (pre)negotiation / leverage
strategic and tactical
Power is used in all negotiations, there are no negotiations that go without power relationships.
Power is measured in resources.
Power is influential in pre-negotiation. For example the exclusion of actors, choice of sites, design of the agenda, choice of mediators. Mostly done by the actor with the most power.
Negotiation itself is a test of power. The powerful will enter negotiation with advantages, and further exhibit their power through success. Final decision is mostly closest at the weaker parties’ security point.
strategic power (resources)
Power that one brings to the negotiations:
legitimate power: derives from a norm that is accepted by the disputants
information power: ability to transmit and manipulate the information
expert power and referent power: status and prestige
coercive power: sticks
reward power: carrots
relational power: connections that people / states have
tactical power
power that someone brings to the table. more the qualities of the mediator itself
communication tactics
image tactics. helping the party’s save face, so they do not commit political suicide
momentum tactics
(exercise of) strategic power
- Hard power (coercive diplomacy)
- Soft power (public diplomacy)
- Smart power (hard + soft power)
hard power
attempts to get another party to change its behaviour through
- the threat to use force / economic inducements
- the actual use of limited force.
It is a mix of negotiation and coercion.
- instead of directly coercing, the aim is to persuade it.
- signaling the utility of settling disputes without having to wage the war
use / threat of force
coercion
hard power - issuance of an ultimatum
setting a deadline / drawing clear red lines / threatening with punishment for non-compliance
hard power - try and see (turning the screw)
after issuing a ultimatum coercer uses limited coercive action. No sense of urgency is stated. Waits to see the reaction of the opponent.
hard power - turning back the screw
gradually indicating that the coercive actions will be reduced if the opponent complies.
soft power
another form of persuading the opponent to change behaviour: getting others to want what you want.
- Ability to shape others preferences by co-opting and not coercing.
- Co-optive power is shaping what others want ( is not command power: shape what others do).
Soft power is not only power of influence, it is also about resources (values, images, culture).
Soft power is context related, soft power is dependent on the recipients’ willingness to internalize these messages.
persuading with co-opting, not coercion.
