Test 2 Flashcards
How does email affect negotiations?
Pros
Ability to think and compose
ability to resist and pressure
may be easier to separate the people from the problem in contentious relationships
Cons
Increased time and effort
tougher to establish a relationship
tougher to convey/assess emotion/personality
tougher to coordinate and develop shared understandings
increased risk-taking
Benefits of using agents
provide critical knowledge/expertise
provide access to people / marketplace
HAve relationships needed for success
Enable you to reduce workload
Also
possible scapegoat, if you need to do some bottom fishing, if need to bring on the bad cop
Downside of agents
Claim resources (bargaining zone shrinks)
goals may conflct with your own
experience loss of control
How to be a good agent
set structural boundaries
consisten information updates to client
“reeling-in” the constituency
Depersonalize to reduce irrationality and hostility
How to be a good client
Is an agent needed or desired?
Analyze the incentive structure
Provide your agent some freedom and flexibility
Selectively provide information to your agent
Agency issues
buyer’s power to choose many agents to switch to
negotiate a commission rate
understand market independent of your agent
select an agent carefully who plays by rules, reputation of selling high (not frequently)
Experience = higher sales prices
In disclosure state that “nothing conveys” to leave room to added appliances, etc. later
Highlights of selling real estate
do not give agent or neighbors information that may reduce your power
do not indicate an desire to move in appearance of house
Auction fever; many potential buyers at home during open house increases interest/demand
Highlights of buying real estate
Tell agen to give you information on houses witha large range;
Do not disclose your RP to your agent
REal Estate BATNAs
time ressure, don’t reveal; consider renting
Find 3 homes would be indifferent to purchasing
Coalition
A group of people who join together to pursue common goals, attempting to influence outcomes
Two or more parties who agree to cooperate toward mutually desirable goal; make an explicit agreement about the division of the attained reward
Power shifts in fragile coalitions lead to defections
Who to include in coalition?
minimum number of persons required to achieve your goals
add those who bring more value than they subsequently remove
How be attractive coalition partners?
Get in early!
impression management; bring lots of power with minimal demands
Highlight trust and interdependence to strengthen
When do coalitions form? Likely vs. Unlikely
Likely
unequal power because one group has nothing to lose or flaunts their power
insufficient individual resources to control the outcome, but combined resources can control outcome
Decision rule is majority rule (vs. concensus)
Unlikely trust ahs been broken, conflict powerful party blocks coalitions insufficient combined resources communication is restricted Decision rule is consensus
Flaunting power
In 2-party negotiations you want to highlight your power; but flaunting in multi-party negotiation can be dangerous
Flaunting can cause others to coalesce against you, even if not in their own best interest
Multi-party challenges
greater range of: interests personalities relationships procedural complexity
Coordination (goals and processes) becomes increasingly difficult with each new member
Strategies for multi-party (3)
Individual / power based approaches
Coalition formation
group problem solving
Group based problem solving
If we work together, what are the chances we succeed?
3 factors predictive productivity:
Actual productivity = Potential productiviy + interaction gains - interaction losses
Potential productivity
nature of the task
available resources
process managed effectively?
Interaction gains
Social facilitation processes = some perform better when working in groups, more motivated
Group efficacy = believe more in groups, results in us trying harder and longer when others are around
Interaction losses
Coordination issues - who speaks first, when, how
Social loafing - people may get laxy, work less hard in a group
Social inhibition - may lose motivation and perform worse in a group; reconcile social inhibition and social facilitation
Managing multi-party negotiations
1) determine who to invite (or disinvite)
2) consider appointing a facilitator (interpersonally skilled, granted authority by all parties)
3) establish discussion norms (rules of order, opportunity for voice and info gathering
4) consider utilizing “delphi” technique (gather info on individual parties, combine info, adapt)
5) strive for an initial agreement (form a basis from which to work)
6) brainstorming vs. alternatives
Multi-party tips
Understand the decison rule (who decides)
Invent, then evaluate (provide lots of time for exploration)
utilize process aids (visual aids or single text)
Group Superiority Effect
Groups tend to be more effective than individuals but individuals tend to be more efficient
Groups learn faster and make fewer errors, but can be less productive
Conjunctive Tasks
Performance depends on how well the least talented member is:
- weakest link
- teams usually do worse than individuals
group size negatively correlated with performance
Heterogeneity: decreases productivity in conjunctive tasks
disjunctive Tasks
Performance depends on how well the most talented member is:
- teams more effective than individuals if the most talented member can convince other team members to go along; high tide lifts all ships
- works best when unique information is shared and there is one obvious best solution that can be demonstrated
group size positively correlated with performance , but diminishes if team gets too large to effectively manage
Heterogeneity - increases potential productivity in disjunctive tasks
Team Negotiations
Added challenges: greater range of interests, personalities, relationships, procedural complexity
Tend to result in more integrative agreements
- more information exchange about interests and priorities
- individuals and teams both tend to believe that the team has an advantage
- 2-7 team members optimal; larger teams have coordination issues
- Structure: leadership issues, social status / power of individuals
- Roles: expected behaviors of positions; divisions of labor/specialization
Team communication
Each member has unique information
- need to pool that information
Common information bials
- teams tend to focus on common info rather than the more useful unique info
Conflict Defined
Conflict - interdependent people perceive incompatible goals or interference with goal achievement
- Direct interactionas a CHEAP means for resolving conflict/difference
we initiate based upon our perceptions of difference
Conflict downsides
Negativity, pessimism, frustration, criticism and blame, increased pitch and volume
Can be beneficial, but could also spiral downward into ugly behaviors and personalization
When do things go wrong?
Norm violation noted, rejection, personal attacks/insults, sarcasm and aggressive humor
- anything that pulls away from tasks, toward the personal
Benefits of conflict
signals growth and opportunity
yield focus and energy
gets problems into the open
demonstrates effort and interest
Three approaches to resolving Disputes
Focus on interests - what do they really want and why?
Focus on rights - who is right and do they have a right to their claim
Focus on power - What forms of coercion, who can hurt the other most effectively
Interest Based Approach
Exploring the nature of the problem, building an environment that promotes exchange, probing questions
Requires tolerance of conflict - rigid interests, flexible means to achieve goals
Pros
- more likely to reach agreement
- more likely to abide by the agreement
- more satisfying
Cons
- Added time and energy
- what if there is a “right” answer?
Rights Based Approaches
Must search for an OBJECTIVE view; turn to social standards, legal standards
Pros
- great when a clear standard exists
- better for having broad impact, setting precedent
- divide issues fairly; good for single issues
Cons Competing standards Biased use of standards - can become about values, which are usually non-negotiable - usually need 3rd party assistance
Power: Foundations
Ability to accomplish objectives and overcome resistance; coerce or inflict harm
Sources of Power
RICE
Resource control - dependency, value
Interpersonal linkages - quantity, quality
Communication Skills - advocacy skills; strategy use
Expertise - a form of resource control
Powers and Threats; Levels
When you make a threat, will be judged on three levels:
1 - Magnitude of harm
2 - Probability of being carried out
3 - Can/will this solution meet my interests and solve my problem?
Power Strategies
Higher power players - messages from powerful people carry added weight
- externalize your power
- give opportunity for voice
- don’t oversell, soften your demand
Low Power players - dont fixate on a single source, use extreme caution when pushing powerful people
- search for alternative power sources
- change the nature of dependency
- realize that the onus is on you to be creative
Power Costs / Benefits
Pros
- sometimes outcome more important than relationship
- need for speed of implementation
- previous efforts have failed/stalled
- vengeance is key
Cons
- significant costs
- can be viewed as aggressive, could create enemies
- short term results, long term pain
When to use rights and power
when other party wont come to the table
when negotiations are at impasse and all other attempts fail
when moving toward agreement and parties are positioning themselves
How to maintain interest based approach
Dont reciprocate contention
dont get personal or take personal
Be willing to reciprocate concessions
Attempt process interventions
Responding Counter-intuitively
Avoid the tendency to push back, create incompatible responses REfrae as a problem to be solved invite criticism for your proposals ask quesions, "what if" create strong BATNA
Steps to calm angry party
1) Solicit information - what happened
2) acknowlegement / Apology - acknowledge emotions
3) Clarify intentions, manage impressions
4) Potential restitution
5) Future relations…looking forward
Succeeding in conflict - 5 themes
Work on timing
Reduce tension early in the process - spend more time learning before hard decisions
Recognize and highlight similarities, empathize, seek shared goals or interests
Depersonalize
Troubleshooting: change the process
Neutral party pros and cons
Pros Increased rationality positive climate - "best behavior" creativity - rational solution seeker motivation
Cons
higher levels of investment - more people more $$
Added layer of complexity
Loss of control
3rd party impact: Motivation
Power to bring parties together
power re: incentives
power to add resources and impact outcomes
What mandate is given?
3rd Party Impact: Outcomes
Arbitration - seeking an outcome ruling from an outside party
History - union vs. management
Variations - voluntary vs. compulsory; binding vs, non-binding; conventional vs final offer
3rd party impact: Processes
Mediation and process consultation - manipulating behaviors; helping to facilitate an agreement through disputants
Ethics
Applied values
Moral principles that set standards of good or bad, right or wrong in one’s conduct
Drivers of unethical behavior
Profit -
Competitiveness - thrill of victory
Justice - sweet irony of fairness
Lack of preparation - we don’t anticipate the tough questions
**First 3 are red flags - opponents tempted to take an unethical approach
Fraud
knowingly misrepresenting material facts on which the victim reasonably relies, causing damage 4 areas: Knowledgeable misrepresentation Material facts victim reliance causing damage
Knowledgeable misrepresentation
Does your partner intentionally give a false impression
Deception vs delusion
reasonalbe knowledge
Sins of commission vs omission - commission riskier
material facts
material central or critical to decision making
Factual - not opinion based, subject to testing
Bluffing vs. Fraud
Bluff - exxaggerated demand; concealing bottom line; creating an enhanced perception of strength
Fraud - telling lies or allowing misperceptions via important facts, verifiable data, known plans or intentions
victim reliance
burden of proof for fraud rests with the victim
causing damage
How much was gained vs. lost
Ethical bargaining tips
Set standards that provide ample cushion between you and the law
bring HEALTHY SKEPTICISM to the table, especially when red flags arise
Cross culture basics
shared ways of thinking/acting = expectations
passed via rituals, narratives
Iceberg!!
Trompenaars’ Model: Onion
Layer 1 - visible/visual reality
Layer 2: norms and values
Layer 3: unquestioned, basic assumptions
Cultural Challenges
Uncertainty and anxiety Rapport and respect more difficult to build and maintain communication barriers becomes harder to make good solutions harder to reach agreements that last
Individualism
Personal achievement, separate personal and professional, independence, efficiency > loyalty
Collectivism
highlights in group ties, welfare and responsibility, group/company takes care, honors loyalty
Power Distance
Egalitariansims - minimizes the importance of wealth/status, seeks equality
Hierarchical - guided by status, deference to social order
Remedies to cultural trap
seek to establish BALANCE
Recognize cultural differences, be cognizant
DELAY judgements, hesitate
seek interpretations of culture-based members
Re-structure our environment to maintain comfort
f
Top 5 Pithy Negotiation Tips
1) Prepare x3
2) Develop your BATNA
3) Take time to build rapport
4) Always seek to understand interests and priorities
5) Search for high quality deals - ethical, rational, efficient, socially, beneficial, stable
