negotiation
NEGOTIATION STYLES and STRATEGIES
BCO 313: Negotiation
Professor Anne Dwyer a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Assignments:_ for weeks 3 and 4
Research: You have been assigned a tactic: you need to share this tactic before session 3 (and upload links to the forum) and comment on TWO uploaded tactics
Practice: online negotiation and diary reflection entries
Read and summarise in a ppt (for week 4)
DO The Print Shop-online negotiation and share your result in the forum (for week 3)
http://www.zapdramatic.com/demo.htm
Test Your Style (for week 4):
https://hbr.org/2016/02/assessment-what-kind-of-negotiator-are-you
Or
https://www.tryinteract.com/quiz/what-s-your-negotiation-style/
or
http://www.negotiatingguide.com/determineyournegotiatingstyle.htm
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Plan: Prepare – Perform - Reflect
Preparation: understanding the issues and the people and equipping the team for the process (due diligence)
Relationship: developing a strategy for maintaining the relationship before, during and after negotiations
Communication: building trust by applying an open communication style
Problem-solving: exploring options and strategies for reaching agreement
What is a negotiation brief?
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Power-based negotiation
Coercion
Aggression
Witholding benefits
This is for bullies!!
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Rights-based negotiation
Cased on laws
Negotiation
Arbitration
This is when you call in a lawyer!!
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Interest-based negotiation aka MGB and win-win
Reconcile interests
Problem-solving approach
Creative solutions
Common ground
Trade-offs
Concessions
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Reconciling interests costs less and yields more satisfactory results than determining who is right, which, in turn costs less and satisfies more than determining who is more powerful.” WL Ury
Interests – power - rights
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Which is the best option?
Transaction costs eg strikes, replacement
Satisfaction of outcomes: “fairness”
Effect on the relationship: long-term, the ability to work together
Recurrence – agreement does not ‘stick’
Interests v Rights/Power – often off the topic
Rights v Power – strain relationship (eg parents/kids)
Power and coercion can damage relationships
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Selecting a Strategy
Relationship concerns: past present and future
Outcome concerns: how important is it?
Situation
Preferences
Experience
Style
Perceptions
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Is about ‘how to share the pie’: assumptions:
Everyone wants the biggest share possible
People do not care if the other party gets less
To get less/to pay more than desired = losing
To get more/to pay less than expected = winning
BATNA (the best alternative to a negotiated agreement) and ‘walk away’ moments are key
Awareness of ‘tricks’ and ‘tactics’ can also be ‘key’
Distributive bargaining
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Zero sum
ZOPA
Bargaining range
Key Terminology
Tactic … set the stage
Create an appropriate environment for the meeting:
Physical: neutral, non-threatening, calm and supportive location, venue and seating
Verbal: clear, understandable language (interpreter?)
Time frame: be flexible
Online: what advice would you give?
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
The round table
The corridor
The table
Setting the scene
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Negotiation style based on the understanding that both sides in the bargaining process have legitimate interests to be protected and advanced.
Sometimes the interests are not the same, sometimes they are directly opposing.
MGB is also known as win-win and/or integrative bargaining and/or non zero-sum
Mutual Gains Bargaining
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Problem solving behaviors:
Focusing on being fair
No positioning
Basing proposal on neutral criteria
Sharing information regarding priorities
Discussing more than one aspect in order determine the possible concessions
Focusing on shared interest
Seeking compromise and/or collaboration
MGB-Mutual Gains Bargaining
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Explain your interests to your opponent -> s/he can propose solutions that meet your needs.
Do not lie or deceive the other party about your true, underlying interests.
Objective of MGB
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Key Processes to Achieving Integrative Neg. 1
Create a Free Flow of Information - effective information exchange promotes the development of good integrative solutions
For this open dialogue to occur, negotiators must:
Be willing to reveal their true objectives
Listen carefully to the other negotiator
Create the conditions for a free and open discussion of all related issues and concerns.
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
The process we describe here can be used for any situation you face. When you are using the process to select a strategy, the decision statement is the goal and the criteria comes from the cultural success factors and obstacles. The alternatives are the different approaches that are available to you.
This logic path assures objectivity and ensures that we cover all essential data.
Making good decisions depends on the quality of our:
Selection of a goal that describes the decision,
Definition of the specific factors that must be satisfied,
Evaluation of the available alternatives, and
Our understanding of the consequences of those alternatives.
Key Processes to Achieving Integrative Neg. 2
Attempt to Understand the Other Negotiator's Real Needs and Objectives
To help satisfy another's needs, you need to first understand them.
Parties must make a true effort to understand what the other side really wants to achieve.
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
The decision is stated in terms of a goal which directs the search for solutions in positive ways. A confused and unfocused group starts getting organized by concentrating on the goal of the solution, not on the solution itself.
In the planning process, the goal is a given, but that is not always the case. Too often we believe the decision statement is a given. In fact, the reason for our decision is essential to opening the search for a good solution. Goals direct the search for positive ways. Ostensibly expand our goal; then create a hierarchy of goals or decision statements.
Compose the decision statement using an action verb, an object and an adjective. The action verb should be prescriptive and concerned with the total set of conditions (for example, to select, choose, determine, have, establish, provide) as opposed to verbs that indicate a measurement of change or incremental goals (to increase, reduce, minimize). The adjectives modify or constrain. They reduce the range of possible solutions with a limitation.
Key Processes to Achieving Integrative Neg. 3
Emphasize the Commonalties between the Parties and Minimizing the Differences
Individual goals may need to be redefined as :
best achievable through collaborative efforts that achieve a broader collective goal.
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Key Processes to Achieving Integrative Neg. 4
Search for Solutions That Meet the Goals+ Objectives of Both Sides
Concern with the other's objectives may be in one of two forms:
To make sure that what the other obtains does not take away from one's own accomplishments
To attempt to block the other from obtaining objectives because of a strong desire to win and even defeat the opponent.
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
To deceive = to intentionally cause another person to have a false belief that is truly believed to be false by the person intentionally causing the false belief.
Example:
Buy now! This offer is valid only today!
I only have € x
That’s my last offer!
Distributive Bargaining + Deception
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Trade Offs
Settlement brochures and video presentations
Bluffing, Puffery
Boulwareism : “best offer/take it or leave it”
Br’er Rabbit: reverse psychology
Mutt and Jeff (Good cop, bad cop):
Belly up
Passive-aggressive
9. Puppy Dog Technique
10 Threats and promises
11. Limited authority/Higher authority
12. Uproar
13. Feel felt found
14. Dumb is smart, smart is dumb
15. First offer
16. Disclosure
17. Walk away
Tactics
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
Upload videos about tactics e.g Good Guy, Bad Guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNHU2E9gKos
Feel Felt Found http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufISOMmGGEA
Dumb is smart, smart is dumb http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oKwg6W05MU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPRlHwwVIug&feature=related
22
The Negotiation Process: clean or dirty?
Tactics vary w/ negotiation position
How much do you disclose?
First offer: aim high? middle ground?
Is making the first offer an advantage or a disadvantage?
Counteroffers
Principled negotiation
Time outs
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
The Negotiation Process
Recognize and Use Milestones
Track achievement of both parties’ critical objectives
Compare “scorecard” when tackling the toughest issues
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
The Negotiation Process
How do you know when you’re done?
Success - Both sides:
Achieve critical objectives
Are “happy” (satisfied)
Failure
Irreconcilable differences
Capitulation of one side
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
When does the Negotiation Process end?
When finished:
Summarize and document
Thank the other party for their efforts
Leave the door open for further negotiation
a.dwyer@euruni.edu
| Integrative | Distributed | |
| Flow of information | Create a free and open flow, share information openly | Conceal information, or use it selectively and strategically |
| Understanding the other | Attempt to understand what the other side really wants and needs | Make no effort to understand the other side, or use the information to gain strategic advantage |
| Attention to commonalities and differences | Emphasized common goals, objectives, interests | Emphasize differences in goals, objectives, interests |
| Focus on solutions | Search for solutions that meet the needs of both (all) sides | Search for solutions that meet own needs or even block the other from meeting their needs |
Distributive Vs. MGB or Integrative Negotiation
The process we describe here can be used for any situation you face. When you are using the process to select a strategy, the decision statement is the goal and the criteria comes from the cultural success factors and obstacles. The alternatives are the different approaches that are available to you.
This logic path assures objectivity and ensures that we cover all essential data.
Making good decisions depends on the quality of our:
Selection of a goal that describes the decision,
Definition of the specific factors that must be satisfied,
Evaluation of the available alternatives, and
Our understanding of the consequences of those alternatives.
Mistake 1: Neglecting the other side’s interests
“Power doesn’t come from telling the other side you are powerful”
“If you want to change someone’s mind you should first learn where that person’s mind is” Rupert Murdoch
Mistake 2: Thinking Price is more important than other factors
50% emotion, 50% economics
Life is more than economics
Perceived fairness, Self-image, Reputation
Relationship
Social contract “spirit of the deal”
Process: personal, straight forward, respectful, fair
Interests of ALL (there are others involved)
Mistake 3: Position drives out interests
Issues are on the table for agreement
Positions: how a party stands on an issue
Interests: underlying concerns
Is this what is happening with the budget in the USA? Remember the rule: Separate the issues from the people!!!
30
Mistake 4: Searching too hard for common ground
There may be ‘no point’
31
Mistake 5: Neglecting BATNAs
Re-read the pdf on BATNAs
32
Mistake 6: Skewed vision
Make sure you can see it their way!
33
Watch – 8m
3m https:// youtu.be/lMA48vIxajE
5m https:// youtu.be/ZtpN5VKdAOM
Discuss
Assignment 1: upload clips about ‘your’ tactic and comment on TWO of the videos uploaded by your peers
Assignment 2: The Print Shop http://www.zapdramatic.com/demo.htm
What tactics are being used here?
www.euruni.edu