I need I help writing a reflection
Ch11
2
Lecture learning objectives
Underline why power is important in negotiations
Identify types & positions of power
Give advice on how to deal w/bigger players in negotiations & partnerships
How to acquire power in negotiation
2
3
Power definition
Power used in a given situation that helps someone to achieve:
Goals
Desires
Perspectives on power:
Power used to dominate and control the other – ‘power over’
Power used to work together – ‘power with’
\
3
4
Perceptual importance of power
Seeking power in negotiation arises from one of two perceptions:
The negotiator believes he or she currently has less power than the other party.
The negotiator believes he or she needs more power than the other party.
4
5
Interests, rights & power in action
Exerting power via coercion could lead to settlement or opponent may call your bluff
Threats based on rights or power may work if there is an impasse or the opponent refuses to negotiate
To be effective, threats must be credible, targeting the opponent’s interests & let them back down to save face & reopen negotiations
5
6
Types of power
(French & Raven, 1959)
6
Expert Power
Legitimate Power
Referent Power
Coercive Power
Reward Power
Expert power
7
Expert power is derived from the ability to assemble and organise information to support the desired position, arguments, or outcomes.
True False
(Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2011)
7
8
Sources of power
8
Informational
Relationship
Contextual
Position
Personal
INFORMATIONAL
Information is the most common source of power
Derived from the negotiator’s ability to assemble and organise data to support his or her position, arguments, or desired outcomes
A tool to challenge the other party’s position or desired outcomes, or to undermine the effectiveness of the other’s negotiating arguments
Information can be presented in two ways: direct or indirect
9
9
PERSONAL:
PSYCHOLOGICAL ORIENTATIONS
Psychological
Cognitive
Unitarian ideological frame
Interests of individual & society are one
Radical ideological frame
Continual clash of social, political & class interests
Pluralist ideological frame
Power is distributed relatively equally
10
10
PERSONAL:
PSYCHOLOGICAL ORIENTATIONS
Psychological
Motivational
Specific motives to use power
Grounded in needs & energising elements
Disposition & skills
Orientation to cooperation or competition
Moral
Philosophical orientation to power & its uses
11
11
POSITION
Two major sources of power in an organisation:
Legitimate
Grounded in the title, duties & responsibilities of a job description & level within an organisational hierarchy
Social construct
12
12
Legitimate power
13
Social structures are inherently inefficient, and this realisation creates the basis for legitimate power.
True False
(Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2011)
13
POSITION
2. Resource power based on position
Control of resources can give capacity to give, withhold or take them away
Key resources
Reward power and coercive power
14
14
RELATIONSHIP
Goal interdependence
How parties view their goals
Referent power
Based on an appeal to common experiences, common past, common fate, or membership in the same groups
Network power
Derived from whatever flows through that particular location in the structure (usually information and resources)
15
15
16
An organisational hierarchy
MIRJAM NILSSON President
VICTORIA LINDQVIST Executive Assistant
AUGUST BERGQVIST VP Finance
MIRA KARLSSON Accounting
ALEXANDER MARTENSSON VP Technology
APRIL HANSSON
Help Desk
KALLE PERSSON Project Manager
ANGELICA ASTROM VP Operations
JENS MARTENSSON Facilities
ALLAN MATTSSON VP Marketing
KALLE PERSSON Project Manager
FLORA BERGGREN VP Production
VICTORIA LINDQVIST Production Manager
APRIL HANSSON Help Desk
MIRA KARLSSON Accounting
IAN HANSSON VP Transportation
ANGELICA ASTROM Dispatch
JENS MARTENSSON Facilities
16
17
An organisational network
Gatekeeper
Star
Isolated Dyad
Liaison
Isolate
Linking Pin
External
Environment
17
18
Network relationships
Tie strength
Or quality of relationships
Tie content
Resource passing along tie
Network structure
Social system
18
19
Aspects of networks
Power is determined by:
Centrality
Criticality & relevance
Flexibility
Visibility
Membership in a coalition
19
20
Holacracy
(Radojević, & Krasulja, & Janjušić, 2016)
20
CONTEXTUAL
Power is based in the context, situation or environment in which negotiations take place
BATNAs
An alternative deal that a negotiator might pursue if she or he does not come to agreement with the current other party
Culture
Often contains implicit rules about use of power which is unequal
Agents, constituencies & external audiences
21
21
22
Roles by group members
Adapted from (Benne & Sheats, 1948)
22
23
Managing those with more power
Don’t:
All-or-nothing
Degrade
Self-inflate
Do:
Build momentum by dealing in sequence
Use competition as leverage
Constrain yourself
Data:
Ask more questions to gain information
Manage the process
23
24
Addendum
The power of not reacting w/emotion
The power of silence
Getting to yes
24
25
How Do I Write a Good Personal Reflection
AUGUST 14, 2011 BY NICOLE FELEDY
In the academic context, you may be required to reflect upon your own learning in order to identify then evaluate, which approaches have been helpful or unhelpful. You may also be asked to consider your own role in the learning process.
The key to writing a successful personal reflection is to remember that it is a personal response made by you. Therefore, your responses are usually different from someone else’s. Your response will be influenced by:
1) Your opinions, beliefs and experiences
2) Similarities or contrasts to your own life (i.e. experiences you can identify with)
3) How real or believable a subject / text is
4) Your emotional state at a given moment
5) Sympathy or empathy with characters
Even though you have been asked to provide a personal response,
you will still need to justify your opinion with reasons why you
developed your ideas. You can support your response through:
1) Examples from the text
2) References to specific events within a text
3) References to specific quotes within a text
Assessment 3
Individual reflection
25
26
References
Feledy, N. (2018). How do I write a good personal reflection. Retrieved from http://isthismystory.com/learning/how-do-i-write-a-good-personal-reflection/
Fisher, R., Ury, W. L., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. London, UK: Penguin Random House.
French, J. R. P. & Raven, B. (1950). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2010). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Radojević, I., Krasulja, N., & Janjušić, D. (2016, October). Holocracy – The new management system. Paper presented at International Scientific Conference – The Priority Directions of National Economy Development, University of Niš. Retrieved from http://isc2016.ekonomskifakultet.rs/article-19.html
26
Add a footer
27
ch12
28
Lecture learning objectives
Discuss what is communicated in a negotiation
Explore how parties communicate in negotiation
Evaluate ways to improve communication in negotiation
Communication & e-communication in negotiation
28
29
Basic communication model
(Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2011)
29
Message in Medium
Receive and Interpret
Communicator B
Encode with language
Message in Medium
Encode with language
Receive and Interpret
Communicator A
Decoding
30
Decoding can be defined as the process by which messages are put into symbolic form.
True False
(Lewicki, Barry & Saunders, 2011)
30
Intercultural communication process
31
Sender
Encodes Meaning
(Deresky, 2011)
Receiver
Decodes Meaning
Medium
Message
Noise
Culture
Feedback
31
32
Culture & communication: A model
Culture 1: Sender’s normative beliefs about appropriate communication behaviour
Culturally compatible communication style
Sender’s communication style
Culture 2: Receiver’s normative beliefs about appropriate communication behaviour
Culturally compatible communication style
Receiver’s communication style
Other influences on communication processes
(Steers, Sanchez-Runde & Nardon, 2010)
32
33
Communication in negotiation
Communication processes, both verbal and nonverbal, are critical to achieving negotiation goals and to resolving conflicts.
Even parties whose goals are compatible or integrative may fail to reach agreement or reach suboptimal agreement
Negotiation is a form of interpersonal communication that is achieved through words or statements, and nonverbal gestures or cues to vie for outcomes
33
WHAT IS COMMUNICATED
IN NEGOTIATION
Offers, counteroffers, and motives
Affiliation motive vs. power motives
Information about alternatives
Politely and subtly
Information about outcomes
Cautious about sharing the outcomes
Sharing after self-evaluation
34
34
WHAT IS COMMUNICATED
IN NEGOTIATION
Social accounts
Explanations of mitigating circumstances
No choice
Explanations of exonerating circumstances
Positive motives
Reframing explanations
Short-term pain for long-term gain
Communication about process
How well it is going
What procedure might be adopted to improve the situation
35
35
Information about outcomes
36
Thompson, Valley, & Kramer (1995) found that winners and losers evaluated their own outcomes equally when they did not know how well the other party had done, but if they found out that the other negotiator had done better, or was even pleased with his or her outcome, then negotiators felt less positive about their own outcome.
True False
(Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2011)
36
37
Relevant questions
Are negotiators consistent or adoptive in their communication patterns?
Does it matter what is said early in the negotiation?
Is more information always better?
37
HOW PARTIES COMMUNICATE
IN NEGOTIATION
Characteristics of language
Logical level (proposals, offers)
Pragmatic level (semantics, syntax, style)
Cross-cultural & cross-gender miscommunication
Use of nonverbal communication
Making eye contact, face or head gestures
Adjusting body position
Tone of voice
Nonverbal cues can be encouraging or discouraging of opponent’s statements or given priority
38
38
Diverse goals
39
The more diverse the goals of the two parties, or the more antagonistic they are in their relationship, the lesser the likelihood that distortions and errors in communication will occur.
True False
(Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2011)
39
WAYS TO IMPROVE
COMMUNICATION IN NEGOTIATION
Manageable questions
Causes attention or prepares the other person’s thinking for further questions:
“May I ask you a question?”
Gets information
“How much will this cost?”
Generates thoughts
“Do you have any suggestions for improving this?”
Unmanageable questions
Cause difficulty
“Where did you get that dumb idea?”
Gives information
“Didn’t you know we couldn’t afford this?”
Brings the discussion to a false conclusion
“Don’t you think we have talked about this enough?”
40
40
WAYS TO IMPROVE
COMMUNICATION IN NEGOTIATION
41
Listening
Passive listening: Receiving the message while providing no feedback to the sender
Acknowledgement: Receivers nod their heads, maintain eye contact, or interject responses
Active listening: Receivers restate or paraphrase the sender’s message in their own language
Role reversal
Negotiators realise that increasing understanding does not necessarily lead to an easy resolution of the conflict
Managing conflict
Using direct vs. indirect confrontation styles based on cultural differences to find collaborative solutions
41
42
Channels in negotiation
Communication is experienced differently when it occurs through different channels
Social presence (social bandwidth) distinguishes one communication channel from another
People negotiate through a variety of communication media – by phone, in writing and increasingly through electronic channels or virtual negotiations
42
43
Face-to-Face
Fast tempo
Better flow of information leading to better decision-making
Verbal & non-verbal cues
Development of rapport & understanding
Higher satisfaction
Schmoozing can be part of the process
E-Negotiation
Direct & to the point
Separate issues from personalities
Eliminate status differences
Lack of verbal & non-verbal signals
Lack of trust
Likely to end up in impasse
Challenging for anyone who does not speak that native language being used
Move too rapidly towards closure
43
RESEARCH FINDINGS ON
FACE-TO-FACE VS. E-COMMUNICATION
Face-to-face negotiation yields more integrative outcomes (no support)
Face-to-face negotiation is preferable to e-negotiation in terms of time duration (support)
Soft tactics are more frequently employed in face-to-face negotiation & hard tactics are more frequently employed in e-negotiation (support)
The sequence of the negotiation media affects both the negotiation process & its outcomes. Face-to-face negotiation prior to e-negotiation leads to more integrative outcomes (low support)
44
44
45
Messages for Online Negotiators
Supplement e-mail messages with phone calls & face-to-face meetings
Set up ground rules for e-mail negotiations in advance
Keep each other in the loop throughout the negotiation process
Use e-mail to craft a series of proposals for your counterpart to consider
Speak up if you don’t understand what the other person has written
(Asherman, 2010)
45
46
Newer vehicles for dispute resolution
Twitter, facebook & texting
Are they worthy platforms to air private concerns?
What are the opportunities & risks?
What do you think could be done to improve dispute resolution in cyberspace?
46
47
Special communication considerations for closure
Avoiding fatal mistakes
Keeping track of what you expect to happen
Systematically guarding yourself against self-serving expectations
Reviewing the lessons from feedback for similar decisions in the future
Achieving closure
Avoid surrendering important information needlessly
Know when to be quiet & refrain from making dumb remarks
Don’t nit-pick or second-guess parties who didn’t participate, but may review the bargaining
Try to be the one who writes the contract to conduct the deal & achieve clarity of purpose
47
48
Takeaway message
Analyse verbal cues & adapt reaction to emotion
Avoid yes & no questions
Ask the other party to write the 1st draft of a contract
48
49
APS
framework
(Make, 2007)
49
50
References
Adler, R., & Towne, N. (1978). Looking out/looking in (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Asherman, I. (2010, January). Make the Most of e-Mail Negotiations. Retrieved from www.asherman.com/downloads/news-2010-10.pdf
Deresky, H. (2011). International management managing across borders and cultures (7th ed.). Sydney: Pearson.
Drolet, A. L. & Morris, M. W. (2000) Rapport in conflict resolution: Accounting for how face-to-face contact fosters mutual cooperation in mixed-motive conflicts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 26-50.
Ebner, N., Bhappu, A. D., Brown, J. C., Kovach, K. K., & Kupfer, A. (2009 ). You’ve Got Agreement: Negotiating Via E-mail. In C. Honeyman, J. Coben, & G. De Palo (Eds.), Rethinking Negotiation Teaching: Innovations for Context and Culture. (pp. 81-103). St. Paul, MN: DRI Press.
Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M., & Barry, B. (2010). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
50
51
References
Make, Y. (2007). Principles and Tactics of Negotiation. Journal of Oncology Practice, 3(2).
Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
Morris, M., Nadler, J., Kurtzberg, T., & Thomson, L. (2000). Schmooze or lose: Social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations. Group Dynamics- Theory Research and Practice, 6, 89-100.
Steers, R. M., Sanchez-Runde, C. J., & Nardon, L. (2010). Management across cultures. New York: Cambridge.
Thompson, L., Valley, K. L., & Kramer, R. M. (1995). The bittersweet feeling of success: An examination of social perception in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31(6), 467-492.
Valley, K. L., Moag, J., & Bazerman, M. H. (1998). A matter of trust: Effects of communication on the efficiency and distribution of outcomes. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 34, 211-238.
51