Conflict Management & Dispute Resolution Report

Linda111
week6.pdf

MSc Management of Projects week 6

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 1

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 1

Conflict Management &

Dispute Resolution

Negotiation

1 OR 50 PEOPLE

• A tram entering Piccadilly has failed brakes; there are 2 tracks available. One will see the tram crash into a wall killing the 50 passengers the other will save the 50 passengers but kill a worker on the tracks. You are standing on the platform. You designed the signalling/the track/the tram. All it takes is you to flip your switch and direct the tram

– To kill 50 people

• OR

– To kill 1 person

• Which do you choose?

The Big Guy

• A tram entering Piccadilly has failed brakes and will surely kill the 50 people on board. You are standing on the platform next to a really big guy. You have studied statics and dynamics you realise that if the tram hit the big guy full on it would come to a gentle stop kill the big guy and save the 50 people on board but only if he was on the tracks. You know you could push him onto the tracks

• Push or not?

Aim and Objectives

• This lecture aims to explore the subject of negotiation as it

applies to PMs

• Objectives

– To introduce The Program on Negotiation at

Harvard Law School (PON)

– To explore theories of negotiation

– To consider the factors affecting negotiation e.g.

culture via Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory

– To consider concepts from other cultures e.g. Guanxi;

Wasta; Schadenfreude etc.

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 4

Haggling = Negotiation?

• In the UK:

– The price quoted is the price

• Some exceptions

– Houses; 2nd hand Cars;?

• Things are changing – some shops will

listen to offers

• Some people like to haggle most do not

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 5 peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 6

Material

• For this lecture students are referred to the

course text: Getting To Yes

• www.pon.harvard.edu

MSc Management of Projects week 6

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 2

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 7

PON

• The Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School (PON) is a world-renowned interdisciplinary center on negotiation and conflict resolution. Drawing from numerous fields of study, including law, business, government, psychology, economics, anthropology, and education, PON works to connect rigorous research and scholarship with a deep understanding of practice.

Jargon

• BATNA [Best Alternative to a negotiated

settlement]

• WATNA [Worst …]

WIN WIN

• WIN LOSE

• Often linked to game theory Wikipedia is

good

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 8

Negotiation

• Positional Neg Distributive Old Bad

– Win/Lose Splitting the Pie

Postional

• Integrative Neg PON better

– Expanding the Pie

• Principled Neg New Good

– Win/Win Increasing or Expanding the Pie

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 9 peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 10

Negotiation

• Main Theories:It is common for theorists

talk of two negotiation theories or strategic

approaches to negotiation:

• Positional Negotiation

• Principled Negotiation

– Principled negotiation flowed from the Harvard

Negotiation Project (Integrative Approach)

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 11

Types of negotiation

• Dispute negotiation, focused on resolving past facts; and

• Transaction negotiation, focused on

reaching agreement for the future

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 12

The Positional Approach

• Manipulative approach designed to intimidate the other party such that they lose confidence in their own case and are pressurised to accept the other side’s demands. Characterized by:

– High opening demands;

– Threats, Tension and Pressure;

– Stretching the facts;

– Sticking to positions;

– Being tight lipped;

– Desire to outdo, outmanoeuvre the other side; and

– Desire for clear victory.

MSc Management of Projects week 6

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 3

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 13

Assumptions of the Positional

Approach

• Negotiation is the division of limited resources;

• One side's gain is the other's side's loss; and

• A deal today will not materially affect

choices available tomorrow

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 14

Risks of the Positional

Approach • Confrontation leads to rigidity;

• There is limited analysis of merits of dispute and relevant criteria for resolving issues;

• There is limited development of solution alternatives;

• Difficulty in predicting the outcome of the competitive approach or control the process;

• Competitors are generally blind to joint gains;

• Competitors threaten their future relations;

• Competitors are more likely to have impasse and increased costs.

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 15

Positional/Integrative/[Distribu

tive] or Principled

• Positional

• The Integrative Approach and The Harvard

Negotiation Project PON Harvard

• Getting to Yes Principled

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 16

Getting to Yes

• The Harvard Negotiation Project

• http://www.pon.harvard.edu/

• Principled Negotiation

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 17

Principled Negotiation

• 4 Point Plan

• People: Separate the people from the problem

• Interests: Focus on interests not positions

• Options: Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do

• Criteria: Insist that the result be based on some objective criteria

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 18

People

• Separate the people from the problem

• Human beings are not computers but:

– creatures of great emotion

– who struggle to communicate

– emotions get entangled

• Before the substantive problem disentangle the people problem

• The participants should see themselves as working to attack the problem not each other

MSc Management of Projects week 6

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 4

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 19

Interests

• Focus on interests not positions

• The object of negotiation should be to

satisfy underlying needs

• Negotiation position obscures what is

wanted

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 20

Options

• Generate a variety of possibilities before

deciding what to do

• Difficult to design optimal solutions when

under pressure

• Think up a wide range of possible solutions

which advance shared interests

• Invent options for mutual gain

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 21

Criteria

• Insist that the result be based on some

objective criteria

• Where interests are directly opposed

• Insist on independent standard

• Market value, expert opinion, custom or law

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 22

The Principled Approach

• Win Lose

• Positional Negotiation Old Bad

• Distributive

• Win Win

• Integrative Negotiation PON better

• Principled Negotiation New Good

• Principled Negotiation

– Principled negotiation flowed from the Harvard

Negotiation Project (Integrative Approach)

Culture and Negotiaon

• Problems

• Many cultures

– Impossible to talk of A SINGLE WESTERN

CULTURE

– Just like its impossible to talk of A SINGLE

EASTERN CULTURE

• Hofstede developed a cultural dimensions

theory

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 23

Hofstede: cultural dimensions theory

• Framework for cross-cultural communication

• how people from differing cultural backgrounds

communicate: among themselves; and how they

endeavour to communicate across cultures

• 4 then 5 then 6 dimensions

• individualism-collectivism; uncertainty avoidance;

power distance; masculinity-femininity (task

orientation versus person-orientation); long-term

orientation and indulgence versus self-restraint.

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 24

MSc Management of Projects week 6

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 5

Hofstede: cultural dimensions theory

• Power distance index (PDI): “the extent to which the less

powerful members of organizations and institutions accept

and expect that power is distributed unequally.”

• Individualism vs. collectivism (IDV): “degree to which

people in a society are integrated into groups.”

Individualistic - loose ties that often only relates an

individual to his/her immediate family. Collectivism,

tightly-integrated relationships tie extended families and

others into groups.

25

Hofstede: cultural dimensions theory

• Uncertainty avoidance index (UAI): “a society's tolerance

for ambiguity,” which people embrace or avert an event of

something unexpected, unknown, or away from the status

quo. Stiff codes of behaviour, guidelines, laws, and

generally rely on absolute Truth. A lower degree in this

index shows more acceptance of differing thoughts/ideas.

Society tends to impose fewer regulations, ambiguity

accepted and the environment is more free-flowing

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 26

Hofstede: cultural dimensions theory

• Masculinity vs. femininity (MAS):

• masculinity is defined as “a preference in society for

achievement, heroism, assertiveness and material rewards

for success.”

• Femininity “a preference for cooperation, modesty, caring

for the weak and quality of life.” Women in the respective

societies tend to display different values.

• Feminine societies vs masculine societies,. This dimension

is frequently viewed as controversial even taboo in highly

masculine societies.

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 27

Hofstede: cultural dimensions theory

• Long-term orientation vs. short-term orientation

(LTO): The connection of the past with the current

and future actions/challenges.

– A lower degree (short-term) indicates that

traditions are honoured and kept, while

steadfastness is valued.

– High degree (long-term) views adaptation and

circumstantial, pragmatic problem-solving as a

necessity

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 28

Hofstede: cultural dimensions theory

• Indulgence vs. restraint (IND): a measure of happiness;

whether or not simple joys are fulfilled. Indulgence -“a

society that allows relatively free gratification of basic and

natural human desires related to enjoying life and having

fun.” counterpart - “a society that controls gratification of

needs and regulates it by means of strict social norms.”

Indulgent societies believe themselves to be in control of

their own life and emotions; restrained societies believe

other factors dictate their life and emotions.

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 29

Compare Countries

• https://www.hofstede-

insights.com/product/compare-countries/

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 30

MSc Management of Projects week 6

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 6

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 31

Concepts from other cultures

• Guanxi 关系 [Wasta; blat; Pituto, old boy

network]

• Face

– mian面

– lian脸

– yan颜

• Face-negotiation theory

• Schadenfreude

Play

• Chinese schools 'robbing young of

individuality'

• "Chinese children do not play enough. They

should play more," Mr Xi said.

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 32

Can Negotiation be taught?

• Or is it learned

• How should negotiation be taught?

• How will we negotiate in this global

village?

peter.fenn@manchester.ac.uk 33