Negotiations are a process of joint decision making and finally reaching a mutually beneficial outcome and solve a disputed situation. Negotiation has always had a strong relationship with power. It has always been an area of utmost importance for negotiators to understand how one with less power can still emerge from a negotiation with a positive result.
Zartman and Rubin (2002) point out that when two parties face each other in a negotiation table, they operate with the greatest autonomy rather than abide to the other’s manacles. If in a situation the one with greater power has an upper hand in the argument, the possibility of attaining an agreement becomes more difficult (Zartman & Rubin 2002).
However, during a negotiation process the power that we see is one that is perceived by us and not necessarily true (Kim & Fragale 2005). It is believed that when the perceived power is equal among the negotiators the outcome of the negotiation is positive, but when perceived power is unequally distributed among parties, it tend to lead to a negative outcome (Zartman & Rubin 2002).
This paper discusses the negotiation process that took place in the role-play session of my negotiation class. This is a report of what I observed as a party in the negotiation and how we as a negotiating group achieved the best possible outcome.
I was a part of the group that supported the NBN tower. I played the role of a health inspector. I was responsible to prove that there was no truth over the heath concern related to NBN tower. I was also responsible to present various designs that would eventually reduce any health risk of the people living there. As I was responsible only for the health related issue, I spoke only when there was any mention or issue raised of the health hazards that the tower to the people living in the community.
When we first entered the room, I observed that the sitting arrangement was around rectangular tables such that the negotiators faced each other. This was a position that helped us to separate ourselves from the other side and use the space to signify the difference between the two groups.
The whole conversation began with each of the groups explaining their role and side in the play. Ardi, the team leader of my group, explained our stand. We opened the discussion for the negotiation with the stand that we could have the tower made with the capital and infrastructure available to us. However, the other side did not think so and they wanted to focus more on the needs of the community.
Our group was supporting the construction of the NBN towers. Our reasons for support were precise – we wanted the tower to develop the area as it would help us get the internet, enhance education of students, help us in case of an emergency, such as in case of a bushfire. However, the group opposing it argued that the tower would not be good for the environment. Their most strong argument was that of radiation emitted from the tower might be harmful to the community.
The opposing group was adamant on their demand of no NBN tower but the fund going to the betterment of the community. This almost showed that we were facing trouble at the negotiation table. However, we fought back with a backup plan. As the negotiation ended, our team leader wrote out the solution on the board, which was a good idea as this allowed all to observe what the outcome to the negotiation was. In addition, came up with a solution then fell behind. The outcome was as follows –
The group agreed on construction of the NBN Towers but that it should be in Moyston rather than being in the middle of the town,
The tower will be constructed in a non-residential farmland in Pomonal,
An environmental report on the tower is to be made for presentation to the committee and
Laura must be compensated for the health hazard radiation had caused.
The second negotiation process was very different from ours. They were discussing the issue of building a refugee centre in the town. The chairs in the discussion were arranged in a circular manner, which created a sense of equality among the groups. However, the atmosphere in the other group was different as in their group it seemed as of both the groups entered the negotiation expecting to win. However, in our case we entered the discussion to reach the best possible solution.
Negotiations are a part of everyday life. Negotiations help in bringing together divergent parties together during policy formation. A common forum creates the space for the differing parties to share their ideas and views as well as look into the interests of the stakeholders. As in case of the negotiation, we had stakeholders like Laura, who was allergic to radiation, come forward with the problems that a tower could cause to the community. However, through discussion, a decision was reached which was mutually beneficial.
References
Kim, PH & Fragale, AR 2005, ‘Choosing the path to bargaining power: an empirical comparison of BATNAs and contributions in negotiation ‘, Journal of Applied Psychology ,vol 90, no. 2, pp. 373-381.
Zartman, IW & Rubin, JZ 2002, ‘The Study of Power and the Practice of Negotiation’, in IW Zartman, JZ Rubin (eds.), Power and Negotiation, University of Michigan Press, Michigan.
Pre-negotiation process is as significant as the real contract negotiation. In this regard, the pre-negotiation process provides a platform for the contractor to approach and manage issues affecting the negotiation. A general perception about pre-negotiation is that the process allows the contractor to determine risks associated with committing into a contract.
In addition, the contractor determines potential conflicts and consequently resolves them in a pre-negotiation process. From this perspective, the contractor uses the process to prepare for the negotiation by adapting co-operative perceptions and behaviors. However, the importance of pre-negotiation is understood by analyzing the concept’s process.
Pre-negotiation stages
The first stage in a pre-negotiation process involves participants’ selection. In this regard, selecting participants who have the authority to make decisions is critical (Druckman, 2001). This is essential as it makes the decision-making process easy. Selecting participants with knowledge and skills on matters pertaining to business contracts is vital. Knowledgeable participants ensure that a negotiation process is valuable to the company.
The second stage of the pre-negotiation process involves setting negotiation guidelines. In most cases, negotiations can lead to a conflict and unresolved issues. In this regard, a framework on how negotiation will be conducted requires prior planning (Druckman, 2001). A negotiation framework is critical in reducing risks that may affect the company’s commitment in the contract.
Through negotiation guidelines a company benefit by linking its values with other parties. In addition, a negotiation guideline narrows down the scope of the contract. In general, effective negotiation guidelines are a major factor in determining the success of a contract.
Setting negotiation agenda is another process that requires preparation before the actual negotiation (Druckman, 2001). In this regard, participants from the negotiating parties are to formulate an agenda using their expertise. This process ensures that a consensus to achieve a common goal is realized before negotiation commences.
Moreover, this process ensures that the negotiation does not consume a lot of time. In addition, the pre-negotiation decision to set an agenda eliminates risks and uncertainties associated with the actual negotiation. From this perspective, the company can determine whether the negotiation is valuable or not.
A coalition building activity should be a core element of the pre-negotiation process. This activity ensures that the company’s public image is improved. In addition, a coalition building activity ensures that all procedures and legalities are duly followed during the negotiation process. This saves the company from negative legal implications resulting from contract malpractices.
From a pre-negotiation process, the company should benefit from an improved relationship with the negotiating partner (Druckman, 2001). This is critical for future business opportunities. Collecting and validating crucial information such as supplier cost and contract value is determined at the pre-negotiation process.
Finally, the pre-negotiation process is significant in managing the company’s expectations. Therefore, the company makes the relevant decisions regarding the terms of negotiation, the role of negotiating participants and contract value.
Techniques
Companies consider government and relative agencies as potential clients (Watkins, Edwards & Thakrar, 2002). However, most of the government business deals are associated with bureaucracy, competitiveness and legal issues. In this respect, companies require special tactics to win government tenders or contracts.
It is important for the company to identify government’s contracting officer. In addition, understanding the authority of the contracting officer is critical prior making any business contact. Familiarizing with the statutes of labor standards is critical since government procurement follows predetermined legislation (Watkins, Edwards & Thakrar, 2002).
From this perspective, a business company should learn statutes related to labor standards. Such statutes include Contract Work Hours and Service Contract Act. In addition, the company is expected to be conversant with the government’s national and socio-economic objectives. It is critical for the company to avoid using bribes as a way of attaining government contracts. Therefore, familiarizing with contract provisions that foster integrity of government procurement process is necessary.
It is advisable for companies to seek conflict resolution from the Board of Contracts Appeal (BCA). It is important to note that conflicts in federal contracts are resolved through BCA.
The best way to maintain a good business relationship with the government is by complying with specifications of the contract terms (Watkins, Edwards & Thakrar, 2002). Therefore, it is necessary for the company to avoid exaggerations of its capacity to handle government business. Therefore, companies should use production control schedules to ensure the capacity of handling government projects is intact. Scheduling of subcontracts to meet the government contract deadline is advised.
Companies should use information technology to improve on service delivery as compared to government way of operations. Mastering electronic commerce offers the government with reliability of outsourcing services to a technology-oriented company. Moreover, it is important for a company to seek experience in government contracts.
This can be realized by engaging in contract deals as a subcontractor for renowned government contractors. Consequently, the company can regularly check on Invitations for Bid (IFB) as reported through the various government agencies. It is necessary to conduct a research on previous bids issued by the government. Conducting a research on government’s practices and patterns in issuing of bids to contractors is essential.
References
Druckman, D. (2001). Turning Points in International Negotiation A Comparative Analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45(4), 519-544.
Watkins, M., Edwards, M., & Thakrar, U. (2002). Winning the influence game: what every business leader should know about government. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
The concept of interdependence is unavoidable in everyday life of both human beings and organizations. Organizations depend on each other in the course of their running either economically, socially or politically and this defines the level of their interdependence. Interdependence is an important approach in negotiation as it makes negotiation effective. In the case of negotiation, two parties are in conflict or there is conflict of interest between them.
They have interlocking goals that they may not be able to achieve independently. The nature of interdependence will determine the type and outcome of negotiations which could either be win-win or win lose. For example in the case of bank customer relationship, a customer may be looking for a loan facility in order to buy a building. The bank depends on the customers to earn interest and the customer on the bank to finance the project.
Integrative negotiation
Integrative negotiation is a strategy where both parties involved in the negotiation strike a bargain to ensure that they achieve their goals in a win-win solution (Anderson, 2010, 1).
Steps in integrative negotiation
Problem identification and definition. While entering into a negotiation both parties should maximize on identifying the hindrances in an open mind by gathering the necessary information without manipulation to avoid any inconveniences (Howard, 1982, 8). The problem should be well defined on neutral grounds.
Maintaining the problem statement. The problem should not be attached to other linkages that may cause interference in solving the problem and therefore clear guidelines on issues at hand should always be maintained without loosing the focus.
Prioritizing the problem as a goal and find any obstacle attached to it. In defining the problem, any hindrances should be identified and dealt with accordingly.
The other step is to come up with an alternative solution and finally select the appropriate solution from the alternatives. The bank customer relationship is a good example.
Planning for negotiation
Planning is very important in negotiation because it will enable the parties involved to be able to organize for meeting and discuss on the issues. Since negotiation is a process, planning on the steps to follow is crucial.
The first step in planning for negotiation strategy is to create a list of wants to address the issue at hand. Then determine the starting point and the conclusion point of your negotiation. The other step is to plan on how to deal with the opposition to every proposal that you make. Then list the benefits you expect from the other party. Finally set the scene where the negotiation is going to take place.
Distributive bargaining
Distributive bargaining is opposite of integrative negotiation and parties tries to divide up the disputed interests instead of making the most of it (Howard, 1982, 8). It involves a win lose situation because one party has to lose for the other one to gain or one get less while the other one gains more.
The tactic used is for one party to have more negotiators that the other party so that the other party gives in to defeat. The problem is not discussed on an equal basis but one party outsmarts the other in negotiation. For instance, the government increases taxes in order to improve the economic performance. The tax payers lose while the government at large wins.
Reference List
Anderson, J., 2010. The accidental negotiator: how to make win-win work for you all the Time. Web.
Howard, R., 1982. The Art and Science of Negotiation. UK: Harvard University Press.
Negotiators utilize various strategies to achieve their goals. These include those that explore difference in interests, among others. In general, all negotiators have an objective, which is to reach an acceptable decision. However, it is quite necessary to note that negotiation tables are usually intense.
In fact, conflict of interest is quite predominant in negotiations. In this regard, it is necessary that negotiators employ strategies that are effective and inclusive. This paper will explore negotiation strategies in the two articles as well as their similarities, differences and applications (Jones, 2009, p. 1).
The first article, which is written by Steve Jones, provides an insight into strategies of detecting lies in negotiations. It starts by emphasizing the fact that negotiators lie in order to prevent exploitation by the other party. In this regard, Jones suggests various strategies that can be utilized to detect lies in different kinds of negotiations.
These include looking for anomalies, listening all the time, being completely aware of the other party’s behaviors and asking right questions. In the process, Jones outlines importance of psychological aspect of negotiations. Moreover, he emphasizes need for physical and psychological observation (Jones, 2009, p. 1).
The second article, which is written by Cathy Cronin-Harris, emphasizes need for proper planning before getting into a negotiating table. In this regard, she highlights the fact that negotiation theory has changed over the years. In fact, she insists that negotiations should be based on interest based bargaining instead of assertion of demands and positions. According to her, careful consideration of underlying issues is more important than previous strategies.
She therefore suggests strategies for providing effective negotiation. These include prioritizing interests, assessing the other party’s priorities, planning factual inquiries, planning of moves based on principle objectives and using money as an option to settle some interests (Cronin-Harris, 2004, p. 44).
The two articles explore strategies for effective negotiations. In addition, they both profess need to understand the other party’s interests in negotiations. For instance, Jones emphasizes need for careful observation and understanding of the other party through both psychological and physical means. This is aimed at understanding their behavior as well as unveiling hidden agendas. Similarly, Cronin-Harris also concurs by insisting that negotiators should assess the other party’s interest and priorities.
A number of differences can also be drawn from these articles. Firstly, even though they both profess need to understand the other party’s interests; Jones uses observation strategies to achieve this. On the other hand, Cronin-Harris uses interest based bargaining strategies to understand the other party.
Clearly, it can be noted that the latter is more open and transparent than the former. In essence, in jones’ strategies, one party tries to unveil what the other is hiding while in the second case, both parties present their interests and bargain based on priorities. It is also paramount to note that the second article emphasizes proper planning before negotiations. This differs from Jones view, which emphasizes scrutiny of the other party.
The two articles are important as they dig into various strategies needed for effective negotiations. For instance, Jones strategies are very instrumental in identifying major issues of concern in negotiation table. This is paramount when dealing with cunning negotiators who hide their motives.
Similarly, Cronin-Harris’s strategies are very important when dealing in open negotiations (professional negotiations) where underlying issues are analyzed to reach a common ground. In essence, Jones strategies are applicable in aggressive negotiations while the latter is instrumental in soft or professional negotiations (Cronin-Harris, 2004, p. 44).
Reference List
Cronin-Harris, C. (2004). Negotiation Strategy: Planning Is Critical. Web.
At the moment a great number of Western companies are trying to enter the Chinese markets which are growing at a very rapid pace. Many of these organizations have to struggle with the cultural differences, existing between them and their Chinese partners.
This paper is aimed at discussing the negotiations between Ericsson and local telecommunication companies. In particular, it is necessary to single out those strategies which proved to be useful and those which did not succeed. We are going to focus on such aspects as communications and relations.
The first thing that we should mention is that the management of Ericsson took a very thoughtful approach to building rapport with their Chinese companies. In particular, they realized that it had been of no use to hasten the negotiation process and at the beginning they invited their partners to Sweden to show them facilities and plants (Ghauri & Fang, 2001, p 12).
This gesture of hospitality proved to be very beneficial because their Chinese partners began to put more trust in them. Additionally, the representatives of Ericsson paid close attention to the indispensible values of Chinese culture, in particular, the importance of keeping and saving one’s face or reputation (Ghauri & Fang, 2001, p 8).
For instance, during one of negotiation sessions, one of Chinese managers made a serious factual mistake; yet his Swedish counterpart did not argue with him. This tactics also turned out to be helpful since it furthered friendly relations between the two sides. Overall, it is possible to argue that the representatives of Ericsson were quite versed in intercultural communication.
Nonetheless, they overlooked some very importance differences existing between Sweden and China, and this presented them with several difficulties. First of all, China is a bureaucratic state with a very complex workplace and governmental hierarchy. This is a country where a power distance is very high which means that the subordinates are very reluctant to make any independent decisions and take initiatives (Ghauri & Fang, 2001, p 17; Mead & Andrews, 2009).
In fact, such behavior may contradict their value system and ethical principles. Many scholars argue that in Eastern cultures the subsidiaries do not usually take the responsibility of their managers since such a decision can result in punishment or at least reprimand (Samovar, Porter & McDaniel, 2009, p 203). The key problem is that the Ericsson representatives had to negotiate with people who were fully authorized to sign the contract or were afraid of doing it.
As a result, they had to make the same presentation more than twice. These peculiarities of Chinese bureaucracy led to considerable delays and expenses. Therefore, prior to conducting negotiations with Chinese partners, the managers of Western companies should make sure that the counterparts are sufficiently empowered to take any initiatives and decisions. Unfortunately, Ericsson managers did not take this precaution.
On the whole, Ericsson’s experience should be taken into account by other European or American enterprises which are planning to operate in China. This case can assist those people, who intend to conduct negotiations with Chine organizations or want to work as managers in this country.
These people should always remember that the idea of employee leadership or empowerment is alien to Chinese business culture. Moreover, one will to learn more about the bureaucratic culture of this country since this knowledge will enable him/her to establish better relations with governmental agencies.
References
Ghauri Pervez & Fang Tony. 2001 The Chinese Business Negotiation Process: A Socio-Cultural Analysis. Journal of World Business. 36 (3). pp 1 – 29. Web.
Mead Richard & Andrews Tim. 2009. International Management. NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Samover Larry, Porter Richard, & McDaniel Edward. 2009 Communication Between Cultures. NJ: Cengage Learning.
Negotiation is a familiar term that transcends common business parlance. In the context of business, negotiation is found as a sub-branch in marketing where it refers to the wider steps applied toward agreement in decisions about buying and selling.
Several situations normally arise where individuals have to negotiate (Gregor, pp79). This may entail negotiating within ones-self or with other parties. In this case, it is therefore important that one understands their ability in terms of negotiation skills and if possible find ways of bettering it.
Body
The modern day marketer is faced with several situations that require great skills of negotiation. How are you able to strike a deal with your prospective clients? How effective are you in convincing the buyer that whatever you are offering is the best deal available? Are you able to respond to the growing wave of market complexities in the scramble for a market share?
Such are the questions that a marketer is forced to come to terms with. It therefore brings the concept of negotiation into greater perspective. In negotiating within ones-self, one has to weigh the benefits and the costs inherent in all the available options and pre-evaluate the effects of a given decision (Graham, pp76). That is what normally creates the conflict of interest between ideals and interests.
Negotiation between two parties is a common day occurrences. A marketer has to be acquainted with certain skills to enable effective negotiation transpire. Filching is an important aspect in the subject of negotiation (Graham, pp45).
It involves making the buyer feel that the bargain they are proposing is very unreasonable. Since it is common norm that people will always seek to spend less while marketers will always want to maximize their profits, the two parties have to strike a bargain. Flinching will help the marketer in persuading the buyer to concede faster to his stance.
Negotiation is also enhanced when the marketer endeavors to get as much information from the buyer as possible. From that information, he can make a dim perspective of the buyer’s psychological orientation that will help him know how much to stress (Gregor, pp83).
It therefore elicits a lot of demonstration of inner feelings, ideas, views and other intrinsic aspects to the alternate party (Gregor, pp69). As such, a marketer should not make the buyer feel that he is quite desperate to sell. He should be ready to walk away without giving room for too much concession. After all, he is out on a profit mission. Moreover there will always be better bargains.
The process of gauging one’s negotiation ability is not an easy process. However, through the use of certain simple ways, it is possible to assess it. By experimentally convincing a buyer to purchase a product and successfully striking a bargain that goes to your interest can be a clear indication that one is not worse off (Gregor, pp71).
Conclusion
It can therefore be said that negotiation is a virtue that is endowed on different people in different proportions. As a very important aspect in a world of limited resources, negotiation skills come in handy in various aspects of the day to day life.
Business people as well as other partakers in business will always be engaged in situations that require them to critically apply their negotiation parameters (Graham, pp56). It is therefore quite imperative that the horn such skills so as to be able to bargain more and transact better in an increasingly competitive world.
Works Cited
Graham, Larry. Marketing Strategies: A New Outlook. New York: Paragon Books, 2003.
Gregor, G MC. Marketing in the Wider Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
The realization of successful transactions among people and/or institutions involves a negotiation process that leads to mutually accepted solutions. Negotiation can be understood as a process that involves two parties with different goals or needs based on a common issue. These two parties find a way of reaching an agreement. People conduct negotiations either face-to-face or through virtual means in business transactions, agreements, and court proceedings among others.
One of the main conditions that must be realized is the acceptance of a win-win situation for the parties involved. In the absence of such conditions, concessions, goodwill, agreement, and better relationship can never be achieved. In the wake of increasing globalization and technological shifts, online negotiation has become an integral part of many businesses. In this case, the two parties meet virtually to reach a consensus.
Under such environments, trust is a key ingredient for the successfulness of the negotiation process. The essay presents a detailed discussion on online negotiation. The first discussion will provide an overview of the definition of the negotiation process. It will also provide insight into the approaches to dialogue theories with a view of discussing how such concepts are important for the success of negotiations. Primarily, the essay will focus on online negotiation, its benefits, challenges, and ways of overcoming them.
Overview of Negotiation
Negotiation is a word derived from the Latin term ‘Negotiationem’ that means to bargain. The term is related to the needs of people who coexist in a particular region. In ancient ages, men used to negotiate their ways of possessing items or sharing their ideologies among families and clans (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 14). Since people required peaceful coexistence in the wake of civilization, powerful negotiations were initiated to ensure that harmony and cooperation prevailed.
Consultative bargaining soon erupted in the process with increased democracy and freedom of communication. In the business fields, negotiations have played major roles in the interventions of buyers and sellers (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 14).
In a political dimension, leaders strive to demark their territories through negotiations, especially in cases that involve the sharing of powers. In the society, social gatherings have been facilitated through negations. Events such as social celebrations where people from different backgrounds meet are normally realized through negotiation processes (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 14).
Approaches to Negotiation Theory
Prescriptive, normative, or descriptive characteristics distinguish various categories of the negotiation theories. The nature of the theories has been based on various disciplines or perspectives in which they originate. From such disciplines, a discussion of negotiation definition can either be reflective on functional, disciplinary, or conceptual characteristics.
Politicians see negotiation as a process used to bring the conflicting parties together based on the decision of unanimity rule. Other people have also viewed negotiation as diplomatic, mechanical, weighted interactions, or relative power that is mutually shared (Van Beest and Scheepers 50).
All theories of negotiation have a common base where the parties must have an agreement. At the outset, the party must be contented that their purpose will be served in a better way if the negotiation results are acceptable. These two parties at the opposite ends always have a profound belief that their interests must be considered first. Initially, the two sides have no interest in reaching the agreement. The perceived opinions amongst the involved parties lead to the negotiation process (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 8).
William Zartman, a negotiation researcher, came up with five different levels of approaches that included structural, strategic, procedural, behavioral, and integrative arbitration tactics (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 8). Structural approaches initiate a negotiation event as a conflict between two opposing parties who have visions that can never be compact.
Theorists who use this approach emphasize the means that are brought on board by the two parties to the negotiation. These theorists outline that the main factor that determines a breakthrough in the negotiation process is power. Each party strives to exercise their powers at individual levels in the negotiation process to achieve their goals (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 8).
The power of individual party can be examined in terms of their convincing ability to win in addition to the available resources that are brought onboard. This approach derives its route from the political theory that lays emphasis on survival. The strong characters survive by doing what they can while the weak must suffer (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 8).
Although the application of the political theory to the negotiation process is significant, its outcome is not guaranteed to either the strong or weak. This approach has a game changer where properties such as those of symmetry-asymmetry balances must be considered to ensure the strong groups or individuals do not have absolute control (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 12).
A major drawback of this approach is that it omits the skills used in negotiations that are essential in shaping the outcome. In addition, there is also emphasis on the placement of negotiation positions. Besides, this approach sometimes leads to the loss of opportunities due to the tendency to hold back positions (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 14).
A strategic approach is coined from both decision and rational choice theories. This approach emphasizes the role played by the goals of the parties in the determination of the negotiation outcome (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 8). Under this approach, the negotiators must always be guided by their mathematical maneuvers and options that leads to greater benefits for them.
The players are also allowed to select the appropriate actions that can lead to the formulation of a concrete decision. This approach always picks a normative negotiation theory based on the best available solution in negotiating issues. Therefore, it is deemed a bargaining technique (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 8).
The framework for this approach is based on the game theories. The game concept focuses on certain mathematical models to define and foretell feasible choices that can lead to the optimization of the negotiation process. Another aspect is the consequences of the actions that are based on the decisions of other parties. The approach also borrows some ideas from the critical risk theory that lays emphasis on the use of cardinal numbers to elaborate the behaviors exhibited in decision-making (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 8).
This theory uses probability estimations when making decisions by conceding defeat in the process of negotiation. In this case, the players must derive their critical risks that are used to initiate the probable solutions. The limitations of the strategic approaches include the omission of the use of power by the undifferentiated parties involved in the conflict. However, the assumption is seen as a win-lose available solutions that are optional based on the rationales adopted by the parties (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 7).
The behavioral approaches lay emphasis on the personalities of the negotiators. The behavior of the negotiators either can be seen as either ruthless or conceding diplomatically to ensure peace (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 8). Online negotiators who use this approach tend to have a dilemma.
These people are observed to be more demanding to ensure that a solution is reached; hence, their approaches are unlikely to succeed. This approach is based on the psychological traditions that have perspectives that all negotiations are about the individuals involved in the process (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 10).
The behavioral models tend to lean on the emotions, skills, and conducts of people. They emphasize on attitudes, persuasion skills, trust, perceptions, and motivation factors that affect the negotiation results. The result of this approach is a win-lose scenario (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 17). These factors significantly influence the nature of online negotiation processes.
The concession approach is centered on learning. The negotiation is viewed as a learning process whereby the parties must reach one another’s concession behaviors. The interests of the individual parties play a crucial role in the determination of the outcome of the negotiation process. The main limitation of the approach is that it emphasizes the positions of parties and absence of predictability (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 15).
Lastly, the integrative approaches pose negotiations as interactions that have win-win potential. This theory finds a way of creating value to ensure that wider varieties of ideas are available for the parties involved in the negotiation process. This approach uses a criterion that is objective to ensure that mutual gains are created (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 23). It also ensures the sharing of information during the formulation of solutions.
It supports cooperation, joint decision-making and mutual gain among the parties. This state of affairs compels the parties to uncover their interests, generate options, and look for common solutions that are mutually beneficial.
This approach is derived from the political, international relations, and social decision-making approaches. The assumption in this approach is a win-win potential with limitations being seen in terms of time consumption and unaddressed barriers that can break the negotiation process (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 26).
Online Negotiations
The use of information technology in negotiation has been increased in the line of businesses such as those involving emails among others. Online negotiations borrow ideas and knowledge of communication and technology in place. In the current world scenario, globalization has ensured business transactions across borders with long distances (Lelieveld et al. 635). Communication plays a crucial role in ensuring that successful negotiations are conducted.
Online negotiations range from organization functions such as harmonization of employee payments, working conditions, and business deals that are conducted at the local and international levels. Besides, online negotiations can be conducted on acquisitions, mergers of businesses, political negotiations, and court proceedings among others (Lelieveld et al. 635).
Anonymity and Affective Display in Online Negotiation
Personal connections to both parties play a critical role in online negotiation. These connections can either be in terms of friendship and acquaintanceships and must be considered as the basis of the negotiations. The degree of similarity as per the judgment of the two parties will determine the success of the online negotiation.
This state of events can be based on the identity of an individual in the negotiation environment that also influences the outcome of the process (Olekalns and Druckman 455). For example, online negotiating parties normally include their pictures when responding to emails emphasize on their commitments to the process of negotiation. It is evident that online negotiations are successful if the parties know each other through initial face-to-face meeting, photographs, and/or video conferencing.
The initial meeting between parties has been identified to yield fruits in their cooperation and relationships due to the effect of limiting the anonymity perspective. Researchers have noted that individuals who have been in negotiation before seeing one another normally have difficulty in cooperating as well as developing a rapport with either negotiators or other party.
Experiments on the visual access have also been identified to boost cooperation whether the negotiations are realized through face-to-face, video conferencing, or pictures (Olekalns and Druckman 455). The affective display is termed as a normal state of physical arousal that is always displayed when one is communicating. This state sometimes varies in intensity; hence, it can lead to changes in mood and emotion among others.
In the negotiation processes, unpleasant or high-intensity anger can be portrayed as negative arousal while happiness can be seen as positive arousal (Belkin, Kurtzberg, and Naquin 28). These factors are highly influenced by the language of communication in negotiation.
Affective display of an individual in a negotiation process must always be considered since it influences people to change their judgments. Positive arousal ensures the enhancement of cognitive flexibility that leads to attention improvement while the negative arousal leads to reduced cooperation. However, a detailed cognitive orientation processing is gained (Belkin, Kurtzberg, and Naquin 28).
Most studies have outlined the importance of the affective displays of other parties on negotiation especially those at the receiving end. The affective displays that tend to be negative as being indicated by the opponents can be observed by the indicators to be their source of power in online negotiations.
A research conducted by Lelieveld et al. (2011) indicates anger directed by one party may be used by a negotiator to obtain a more concession from the opponent (Lelieveld et al. 635; Belkin, Kurtzberg, and Naquin 28). Sometimes, the expression of anger among the players in the conciliation process can bring about a distributive gain. This situation implies that people with higher powers in the negotiation processes express anger in most cases (Lelieveld et al. 635).
When too much anger is expressed, it can inspire the opponent to be deceptive for the scale to balance (Lelieveld et al. 635). Online negotiation whereby one party portrays overblown anger may lead to a reverse impact where the sender is perceived to be weaker. A research conducted by Sinaceur et al. (2011) demonstrated the use of threat in negotiation. The negative consequences were stated to be results of not complying with one party’s request.
It revealed one of the most efficient means of expressing concessions by the other party in negotiation process. It is more productive than anger expression when communicating (Sinaceur et al. 1018).
This is because individuals with more powers in negotiation in most cases tend to have control on their feelings and decisions while the opponents imply traits of weakness such as losing control among others (Sinaceur et al. 1018). Therefore, it can be noted that the receivers secure their positions of power in most cases. As a result, the negotiator must ensure that the content of negotiation is the most important aspect or else the parties will portray negative tactics (Sinaceur et al. 1018).
A conclusion can be made that negative effects indicate signals that show dominance that can then be used to change one’s perceived opinion or behavior in the negotiation process especially in uncertainty conditions especially on the online negotiation where judging one’s power is difficult (Sinaceur et al. 1018).
Other researchers have also indicated that positive expressions such as being happy when communicating always result in opposite effects on the negative displays of other party especially when online negotiations are being carried out. Take for example if a person sends a message that clearly portrays his anger, such can be analyzed by the receiver as a stronger position in negotiation; hence, the receiver can perceive that there is no concessions(Van Beest and Scheepers 50).
When the information is conveyed well, the receiver tends to think that the source is less powerful. It is indicated that people with lower power always are appreciative, grateful and admire when responding to positive messages while they feel guilty when responding to negative messages (Van Beest and Scheepers 50).
People of higher powers are always portrayed to have dominance and are independent while lower power people are fond of warm and are communal. It can be concluded that positive effects are associated with people of lower powers while negative effects are associated with people of high powers especially the senders of information.
Negotiators who intervene on online negotiation normally perceive that messages with positive effects portray the senders as being in possession of lower powers (Van Beest and Scheepers 50). They tend to be submissive and desperate. This situation is perceived as an advantage to the opponent.
However, the approach is different from that adopted by the sender who uses anger as an expression when sending e-mails. As a result, it is deemed more powerful. Some people who pose anger in the end always demand higher value and expect more out of the deal. The positive effects lead to an individual getting less gain at the outcome of negotiation (Van Beest and Scheepers 50).
In ensuring negotiation outcome to be in one’s favor, the parties always strive to receive positive messages. This situation puts them in a position to feel that they are powerful due to their perception of the weaker end as portrayed by the other party who sends information that is more powerful. This set of circumstances influences the results of the negotiation process (Van Beest and Scheepers 50).
Expectations of Negotiator in Online Negotiation
Some aspects of the relationship lead to the optimism of the negotiator on outcome. The negotiator can easily ensure that parties arrive at fruitful conclusions if they are known to each other. Most of the legal negotiations have been fruitful in situations where two parties have met face to face prior to the negotiation dates (Van Beest and Scheepers 50).
The communication medium used in the negotiation process plays a critical role in ensuring that negotiator is optimistic about the positive outcome in the negotiation process. The voice of participants in the negotiation process can also make the negotiator be optimistic about the outcome of the process.
A research conducted by Lelieveld et al. indicated that parties who meet face-to-face are more likely to trust one another than those who meet virtually during negotiation (635). It is important for the representatives to ensure that such parties meet prior to online negotiation. In such cases, the negotiator is likely to be optimistic about the positive outcome. In incidences where distances are barriers to negotiation, the negotiator must strive to ensure that video conferencing is used in the process (Van Beest and Scheepers 50).
Importance of Online Negotiations
Online negotiations have been noted to possess various benefits. At the outset, there is a physical absence of the parties involved in the negotiation. The use of body language can therefore not be used to posse judgment on one party to be more superior or inferior. The virtual environment provides an equal ground thus party who tends to be shy may take the virtual nature of the environment as an advantage (Lelieveld et al. 635).
The second advantage is that virtual negotiations eliminate the aspect of physical advantage in cases whereby the room being used can enable one party to feel more comfortable than the other party. Virtual negotiations do not have a physical selection of location. The opponents chose only when they are comfortable to negotiate and the favorable time for such activities to take place (Van Beest and Scheepers 50).
Another advantage is seen in terms of enhanced flexibility. There is no time wastage since the negotiators can easily schedule an impromptu meeting or follow-up to close the deal quickly. Issues of expenses in transportation are also omitted; hence, the problem of distance as a barrier is solved (Van Beest and Scheepers 50). Online negotiations provide more information, especially where facts are required.
One can easily search for more information on the internet quickly and at a lower cost. This state of events can be helpful especially when the other party tries to discredit various alternatives that one might bring on board during the negotiation process. Furthermore, they have been deemed quicker in the realization of concession and problem solving. Besides, online negotiation ensures that hostility is observed in face-to-face negotiations is reduced (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 15).
The absence of non-verbal cues normally ensures the reduction of hostility and conflict in the negotiation process. This type of negotiation also guarantees the effective elimination of status differences between parties that negotiate. As a result, the parties treat themselves as equal. Communication under such circumstances is done without bias (Daniels, Walker, and Emborg 15).
Challenges of Online Negotiation
Negotiations that are conducted via emails are prone to challenges due to virtual contact of the two parties. Most people always perceive the responses of the other parties as rude owing to the lack sincerity on the negotiation processes. Situations that require immediate responses via emails sometimes take time due to network issues.
In such circumstances, other parties can perceive such situations as negative tactics that are used to delay the process. If the problem being solved touches the emotions of the parties, the absence of the other party hinders aspects of facial expressions. As a result, negative results can arise (Olekalns and Druckman 455).
Most negotiators who are based internationally have problems of cultural barriers to communication processes. Issues that surround social norms, body languages, physical appearances, and manners are excluded from the communication process. This state of events can derail the understanding amongst the involved parties (Olekalns and Druckman 455).
The parties only rely on the sound intensity, speed, and reflections to get useful information. This situation leads to low social awareness and instability as well as the lack of cooperation when interactions are conducted online. Most negotiators who solve issues virtually at the first step bring both parties face-to-face. The process is aimed at building rapport to create social awareness of the negotiation with a view of conducting the process successfully.
Those who fail to meet face to face, a video supported conferencing technique is used to aid in negotiation process. In this case, both parties get along each other by introducing themselves, setting up individual goals, and acquaint themselves with the issue at hand (Olekalns and Druckman 455).
Management of trust is quite hectic in online negotiation. Most people are honest when delivering information in person. In some cases, parties hold back private information thereby posing a challenge to the online negotiation process.
Most researchers who have indicated that most information given online tends to be full of lies, mostly irrelevant and ambiguous thus clarity is always minimal have confirmed this situation. The provision of inadequate information is also noted in emails and phone calls, especially when strangers are involved in the negotiation process (Olekalns and Druckman 455).
Proper Way of Managing Online Negotiations
The first step in making online negotiation requires prior knowledge of the parties involved in the negotiation process. The negotiator must ensure that both parties are first brought together for face-to-face meeting. This step is specifically done to ensure the creation of social awareness. The meeting of such individuals can also be done through video conferencing in cases where transportation costs are high.
The parties must introduce themselves and provide information about their concerns. The next step entails vigilance. At the beginning of negotiation, both parties have high mutual trusts; hence, they can communicate information via any means that are readily available. The negotiators must be attentive to the language of communication. They must constantly monitor the whole process and correct misunderstandings that can arise. The close monitoring process must also embrace social awareness of both parties.
Conclusion
Negotiation is mostly conducted on a face-to-face basis with emphasis on the personal contact. The expression of personal behavior by the other party portrays the sincerity of the negotiation process. Although such aspects are observed in negotiations, online negotiations have been noted to increase in the current world due to increased technology and globalization. People tend to be occupied on many occasions.
This situation makes face-to-face meeting a waste of time and other resources. As a result, people have embraced online negotiation as a way of solving conflicts and striking deals among activities. This new way of negotiation has been found to come with its pros and cons as has been elaborated in the essay.
Therefore, its choice mainly depends on the two parties’ relationship prior to the ongoing deals. The familiarity of the parties to the issue at hand is essential in ensuring trust that is a key in making such negotiations successful. Therefore, it is recommended that online negotiation should be implemented only if a rapport has been well established between the parties involved.
Works Cited
Belkin, Liuba, Terri Kurtzberg and Charles Naquin. “Signaling dominance in online negotiations: The role of affective tone.” Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 6.4 (2013): 285-304.
Daniels, Steven, Gregg Walker and Jens Emborg. “The unifying negotiation framework: A model of policy discourse.” Conflict Resolution Quarterly 30.1 (2012): 3-31.
Lelieveld, Gert-Jan, Eric Van Dijk, Ilja Van Beest, Wolfgang Steinel and Gerben Van Kleef. “Disappointed in you, angry about your offer: Distinct negative emotions induce concessions via different mechanisms.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 47.3 (2011): 635-641.
Olekalns, Mara and Daniel Druckman. “With feeling: how emotions shape negotiation.” Negotiation Journal 30.4 (2014): 455-478.
Sinaceur, Marwan, Gerben Van Kleef, Margaret Neale, Hajo Adam and Christophe Haag. “Hot or cold: Is communicating anger or threats more effective in negotiation?” Journal of Applied Psychology 96.5 (2011): 1018.
Van Beest, Ilja and Daan Scheepers. “Challenge and threat responses to anger communication in coalition formation.” Journal of Economic Psychology 38.1 (2013): 50-57.
In business, the art of negotiation is very critical in reaching a compromise in all the process of decision making. Notably, bringing the two parties together to agree on a common course is a necessary practice in ensuring success in the running of company operations.
There are a number of definitions, which have been advanced on the definition of negotiation, depending on the context from which the author does his study. For instance, “Negotiation is a process where two parties with differences which they need to resolve are trying to reach agreement through exploring for options and exchanging offers-and an agreement” (Fells, 2009, p.3).
Thesis Statement
Since the company operations are prone to conflict of interests, the art of negotiation becomes a very useful tool for ensuring that the two opposing sides agree. Often, this is achieved through the application of various communication theories in solving the conflicts.
Problem Analysis
Knowing that Danya was a best performer, the supervisor was hesitant to grant the leave so that he could meet the strict deadlines he had to meet. In this case, the supervisor applied authoritarian theory in executing his mandate over the workers through applying direct control. The problem was about denying Danya the leave she applied even though she was a very dedicated worker.
Furthermore, the controversy was complex because Danya had bought air ticket and feared that she would lose her money if the company did not grant her leave. On the other hand, the supervisor considered this time so crucial that he could not grant her the permission to be absent.
Due to her dedication at work, the supervisor knew that he would not meet the strict deal that the short contract required without her contribution. Rejecting her leave application only showed that the supervisor acted within his legitimate mandate since “Legitimate power is based on a person’s position or role in an organization” (Dwyer, 2006, p.155). In using his position, the supervisor considered the amount of work that his team was expected to complete within the short timeframe.
Apparently, settling this problem was not easy because “the most important element of effective negotiation, says Rowe, is preparation, preparation, preparation” (Goodman, 2007, p.64). For example, Danya did not consult the supervisor if she could be granted leave before rushing to buy the flight ticket. Similarly, the supervisor was not prepared to receive a leave application from Danya; hence there was no preparation to counter the concern of each party.
Solutions
According to Elearn (2009), in order to solve this problem, the concerned parties had to negotiate a number of issues, meaning that the number of solutions might increase. Therefore, in offering solutions, it is significant that the two parties observer the problem solving steps “The first step in negotiation is scanning alternatives, a task that normally involves research”, without rushing to justify non-practical means (Spangle & Isenhart, 2003, p.71).
Considering this case, some of the solutions include the following. First, in her quest to see and buy for her grandchild a gift and pay them a visit, Danya was exercising the social responsibility theory. Although she had a social role to play at the family level, Danya had to negotiate with her son and the entire family members to inform them about the situation at the company.
She would inform them that the leave she had applied could not be granted because of the new workload that the workers had to complete within a short time. The second solution to this dilemma would be that Danya should negotiate airline authority or the travelling agent that sold her the ticket, explain to them the reasons for cancelling the trip and if she could be refunded the money.
Third, Danya should negotiate with the supervisor and explain to him the reason for applying for the urgent leave, and that if not granted; she would lose the money she had spent to purchase the flight ticket. Fourth, the Danya should negotiate with the supervisor if he could consult the company authority to employ another person on temporary basis to help ease the workload and complete the contract according to the schedule.
In making sure that the solutions addresses the supervisor and Danya’s concerns, “the overall intervention strategy seeks to engage and commit the two parties to mature and responsible negotiations with the aim of achieving mutually beneficial agreements, or so-called “win-win solutions”” (Gatchalian, 1998, p.222).
In negotiating for amicable solutions, the bargaining parties should not be overwhelmed, thus should respect the principle that states, “don’t leave the negotiating table without writing it all down in a positive summary document agreed by both parties” (Shetcliffe, 2006, p.18).
Unfortunately, Danya became emotional and felt that her dedication and loyalty to the company have been overlooked. In an emotional response, she disregarded carrying herself ethically and bursts into tears and stormed out of the office, which is not justified according to Leimbach (2011).
The Best Solution
In order to find the best solution, Spangle and Isenhart acknowledged that the “Participants explain their perception of the problem, identify specific issues that need to be addressed, and lest interests that need to be satisfied for a satisfactory agreement” (Spangle & Isenhart, 2003, p.78).
Here, Danya and the supervisor should advance and justify their argument so that after thorough scrutiny, the best compromise is reached for all. The best solution is that Danya should forgo the trip and concentrate on the new contract. Finally, “It is important to reiterate that the BATNA is an alternative outcome that is acceptable to you and still constitutes a win” (Leimbach, 2011, p.36).
Stimulus Response Theory
In finding the best solution, the supervisor ought to have used the stimulus response theory in convincing her about the task ahead. The theory advocate for proper communication aimed at influencing one’s decision.
Solution Implementation and Evaluation
Implementing the solution is another milestone that the two parties should negotiate properly. For example, guided by the win-win principle, “Negotiators are not, therefore, usually aiming to beat an opponent or extract an exploitative deal: They want one that satisfies their requirements and serves their interests” (Guirdham, 1995, as cited in 2008, Negotiating win-win solutions, p.75).
In regard to this principle, the company should accept to refund the Danya’s money. This could only succeed if the parties applied modeling behaviour theory. The theory advocates for changing the people’s attitude and behaviour to adjust to the environment.
In case the airline authority or the travelling agent that sold her the ticket accepts to refund her the money, then she should not expect compensation from the company, but negotiate with the company to grant her leave once the contract ends.
In negotiating this deal, “It requires the negotiator to refrain from placing blame and instead create a cooperative relationship at the outset” (Lens, 2004, p.508).Therefore, it means that the company operations are not hampered with, at this critical time, and Danya would finally get leave to visit the family.
Conclusion
In summary, the manner in which the organisation solves its problem shows its level of maturity. Although problems arise in the execution of duty, the management must be ready to apply the relevant communication theories in negotiating a compromised position. The common ground helps in solving the cases, which the different parties bring to the negotiating table.
References
Dwyer, J. (2006). The Business Communication Handbook. 9th edn. Australia: Pearson.
Elearn. (2009). Positive Working Relationships Revised Edition. London: Taylor & Francis.
Fells, R. (2009). Effective Negotiation: From Research to Results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gatchalian, J. C. (1998). Principled negotiations – a key to successful collective bargaining. Management Decision, 36(4), 222-225. Web.
Goodman, B. (2007).The Art of Negotiation. Psychology Today, 40(1), 64-65. Web.
Leimbach, M. (2011). Don’t leave good business on the table: Five strategies to NEGOTIATE win-win deals. Agency Sales, 41(5), 34-37. Web.
Lens, V. (2004). Principled negotiation: A new tool for case advocacy. Social Work, 49(3), 506-13. Web.
Shetcliffe, J. (2006). The art of negotiation. Insurance Brokers Monthly, 56(8), 18- 19. Web.
Spangle, M. & Isenhart, M. W. (2003). Negotiation: Communication for Diverse Settings. New York, NY: Sage Publications.
Diversity at work is one of the most important aspects of a successful business. In the organization, one of the most important types of diversity is the different gender (male and female). Having different genders working side by side at work is one way of balancing the needs of income and outcome of work. In this balance will not be effective if we don’t have a successful way to negotiate our needs in the organization so as to be able to reach our goals (Bartáková, 2010, p. 193).
Gender diversity is also one of the modern society needs in work and has become very important for the organization’s growth. This is in the division of a modern society having first started in the western societies. This was as a result of the growth of women’s education where women began earning bachelor’s degrees in greater numbers than their male counterparts (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
Presently, women earn 57% of all bachelor’s degrees handed out, 59% of all master’s, 48% of PhDs, 49% of law degrees, and 42% of MBAs (Eagly & Carli, 2007, p. 76). Women become more workers hence increasing division of gender at the work. It all started in the western societies and that is after women had a growth in their education thus being more likely to work and support their families (Bartáková, 2010, p.194).
So as to have a better understanding on the organization process we have to understand the way genders negotiate at work. This is because negotiation is the key to having a successful business and for that it is very important to understand gender behavior in negotiation. The main aim is to reach the best deal and target in our negotiations as well as how gender statues have an effect on their behavior in the negotiation, and how different genders behave about knowing how to reach the agreement successfully or can’t control the situation.
At the same time, they will know how the different genders will be able to communicate with the verbal communication effectively and the cause behind having dysfunctional in the negotiation agreement (Bowles and Flynn, 2010, p.772). To be able to understand more on the business we have to know the meaning behind negotiations. Well, negotiation is the most important social behavior in the business and in the work place.
In order to have successful negotiation we have to understand the different gender behavior in the work place and the way they react to word social infraction and negotiation based of fare as well as equity between men and women. Sociologists have studied how women react towards social interaction based on their character and how that will influence their behavior in work place and especially in negations.
Research has shown that the gender of the negotiator has a huge influence on the outcome of the negotiation (Amanatullah and Morris, 2010, p.257). research also shows that women have a different reactions toward some type of business negotiation, depending on the type of business that they are negotiating at especially when this type of jobs are usually dominated by men such as business in automobile or in engineering or house constriction.
For many different resin first is the way that negotiation of their type of jobs , and second that is because of the culture or belief that women’s ability to understand this type of work will make her less wanted to be listened too or talk with in the that type of work negotiation. They are also more likely to trust and talk to men to negotiate with (Amanatullah& Morris, 2010, p. 258).
The definition of negotiation
For women to have a successful negotiation in the work place they have to understand the fundamental knowledge of the negotiation the definition of negotiation is “conferring with other opponent that is for reaching an agreement”(Berlin,2008, p. 14).
There are different steps that will make women be able to negotiate in work place very successfully. they have to understand the target for the negotiation and have to be focused on one goal which is having the best alternative from the negotiation the second step is to setup as the BATNA (best alternative to a negotiation agreement ) (Lewicki et al,2009, p. 107).
This is because it is the most important definition for the successful negotiation, by having focuses on the value then focuses on the point of the negotiation and have to reach the higher and most of the outcome from the negotiation (Berlin, 2008, p. 15)
Mental Models in Negotiation
A lot of negotiation success is about the mental and expressing the background around expecting the other person’s negotiation or to reach an agreement or non-agreement in the negotiation. It is also the culture and the society background to have a big effect on having a successful negotiation, the thing that is the partner negotiating at could reach an agreement if mentally and culturally accepted.
They should not reach an argument if the subject they are negotiating about is not accepted. It is also a shared interest in a subject of the negotiation to have a big impact of accepting and reaching the agreement and having the best BATNA in the negotiation (Bazerman, 2000, p.279)
Gender and Persistence in Negotiation
Studying gender behavior in the work place is very important because it has a huge impact on the organization development. The different gender working in the negotiation is an important resource for the diversity work force in the organization (Bowles& Flynn, 2010, p. 774).
There is a big different on the effect of the gender in the negotiation in the work place and the impact and the facture of the negotiation, the challenge that women face in the negotiation is sex stereotypic and the perspective of women negotiating in the work place that is because they believe that women are more naysayer in the negotiation more than men, that will make it difficult to reach an agreement or make it essayer to reach the BATNA in the negotiation.
In the other hand anther study have shown that the naysayers in the negotiation is not related to the gender but is related of the type of negotiation and how they employees male or female function in work. It is very important to understand how gender behavior persistence in negotiation and how different genders are having the motivation to continue the negotiation and reaching the last agreement in a very professional and satisfying way, for both sides , and how different gender will be having the different way and behave to reach the agreement (Bowles& Flynn,2010, p. 775).
When we compare men to women in the negotiation we find that women and man have a different type of behavior depending on the gander that they are negotiation with (the gender of the opponent). Research has shown that the type of speech that women use with men is more low statues speech style, lower that the type of speech women would use with women that is negotiating with (women with women).
At the same time, studies have shown that when it comes to negotiation between different gender women are more influent when talking to men than when she talks to fellow women. Also the study has shown that men are less likely to change their speech style when it comes to negotiating with different genders. The reason behind women having different types of speech in negotiating with different gender is because men historically have been working more longer than women and second is because of the shift of the social statues for woman in the culture and how this has influenced their behavior towards different gender( Bowles& Flynn,2010, p. 775).
Challenges women face in negotiation
The most common challenge that women face in work is that of negotiating for their rights in their work place. One of their important rights is the women’s annual salary as a full time working is more less than the men full time working salary ,but this percentage has increased in the last 10 years, from 60% less than the men salary tell 80% less.
Despite the fact that the percentage has increased it still less than the men’s salary and a lot of women in the work place have reached to have the same men acceptation (job) but with less salary. The reason behind this is a lot of women do not ask or negotiate for more and they feel happy with what they have. Since they do not have the courage to ask for more and or negotiate for a better salary women stay in a lower income as compared to a man of the same job but willing to ask and negotiate their mangers for more salary.
The other reason that women do not negotiate for a higher salary is because they feel that they will undervalue their service and they think that they don’t deserve more. that would make them less comfortable to negotiate for a higher salary but on the other side men will feel that they are doing more than they have to do in the work and they deserve to have more salary (Craver, 2004, p. 1104).
The other challenge that women face in the organization specifically against women who have families and children men in the organization as a manger will have this image or idea about these women as not to being able to handle a lot of responsibility. This is because they have to take care of their children and take a lot of day off to be able to take their children to school or hospital, so men as a manager will not be able to believe there able to work effectively or to negotiate effectively (Denker, 2009, p. 105)
The different between men and women in the negotiation
In the organization there is a lot of questioning about whether the men or women are the best negotiator, and the recent of researches have shown that gender is not the effective way to identify between good negotiations. However, there is a specific type of negotiation that can show the different outcome forms of negotiation by men and by women that is there is a limited opportunities or the negotiation is not clear, or if their an ambiguous situation such as in ” telecommunications, real estate, health services, and media” (Pradel, Bowles, and McGinn, 2006, p. 2).
In the negotiation that will show the different behavior between the man and women in the business negotiation. But by understanding there functions and knowing the advantages and the disadvantages we will be more able to have more equity in negotiation Opportunities for both men and women in the workplace (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p. 3).
Having these differences it could create a different in the both men and women for the long team in the organization in the negotiation when both parties have unclear understanding the ambiguity of the negotiation will increases and when the ambiguous in the negotiation is very high the different between the male and the female in the negotiation will be very clear and they will have a different performance and different outcome for the negotiation (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p. 1)
But on the other hand in a situation with a low ambiguity in the negotiation three will be a high understanding for the situation and a high performance from a male and a female and also in some situation well find a very high performance from female or a high performance by male individually that is depending on the subject that they are negotiating at.
But also in a competitive work environment men are more likely to perform very well better than women because mostly women stumble in a competitive situation (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p.6). Females have a different way to negotiate researchers have found that women is very successful when the negotiation for when the benefit is for another person such as negotiating for a children right as an example (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p.1).
Since both of male and female are successful in negotiation but every side have either own strength in a way for negotiation (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006)
How to have a high benefit of gender differences in negotiation
There are some factors that we have to fallow to have the higher benefit from both genders. When there is some ambiguity in the negotiations, we have to avoid having behavior that may accrue naturally from a man or from women. In other words control you behavior male or female.
For example in a competitive negotiation men are more likely to have it too serious and have and try to maximize their outcome, in the other hand women more likely represent or defend other people such as colleagues’ department. So men and women have more control for their behavior in the negotiations (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p.6).
The other thing in the negotiation no matter if you are a man or a woman you have to do your homework and learn about what you can get benefits from the negotiation. It is more likely to be when negotiating for a salary, do your investigation ask others who are already employees about the benefits. The most important is never be afraid to ask or search for the right information that to get you motivated and to make you have the best notations and best benefit that you could reach (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p. 4).
The managers in the company have to create transparency when it comes to salary and benefits in the work place and that is by having a clear published benefits for both male and female that the company is offering as well as having a standard of issue and negotiations in a very fair way for all employees with different gender (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p. 5)
Set a clear expectation for the employee’s performance. When employees have sent to a negotiation with a clear expectation and clear goals they will be able to be more confident both male and female and more likely to accept the last agreement and both male and female will reach the best outcome from the negotiation. Having this clarity in the negotiation is more likely to help women in a negotiation especially when it is an ambiguous and competitive satiation in the negotiation (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p. 4)
What will women do to be a better negotiator?
If we want women to me more successful in the negotiation we have to understand women’s sociology and how she behaves. Women are more likely to be emotional in there normally but how can she control her emotions? (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p. 5.). The most important thing when facing difficult time in the negotiation Is not to be emotional and react back to the situating, stop for a moment and take a time out from the situation, stand behind and rethink about the situation and look at is as an objective by having giving yourself a time out.
This way you are more likely to sprite your emotion from the situation and by that you are more likely to think about it wisely to reach your BATNA (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p.6). Since women are more emotional we have to know and understand that may make them emotional in the negotiation. Women have to know what her hot buttons “emotional susceptibilities” is you are more likely to be aware if the other person is trying to make you reach this part of your personality.
And by recognizing your hot buttons you are more likely to be able to control your emotion. This is very important to be successful in a competitive station and interments in the organizations (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p. 5). In a situation where you want to think you could pause and think the best way to do that is to learn the conversation to the other opponent and make them do the talk so you could have your time to rethink about the situation (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p.4).
And when the station needs more time to think you can do that by playing it back and slowing the conversation and that by saying to your opponent to review again the main point that the negotiation is all about. And if you need more time to think about the situation, ask for time out from the negotiation go out rethink and renew your ideas again and have a better way to control your emotions (Pradel, Bowles, & McGinn, 2006, p. 8).
You have to be very aware when the situation is a bit ambiguous and there are a lot of emotional pressure on you to agree in the siltation don’t agree because of the pressure that you are facing in the situation but and don’t make the agreement on the spot have another time out retching and make the diction and go back again to the negotiation table and give the agreement that will make you more likely to reach your BANTA (Ury, 1993, p. 209).
Conclusion
Understanding how to control your emotion has a big impact on having a successful negotiation. You have to know how to protect yourself because reaching an agreement in the business. This is an important deal and you will have a huge understanding of your opponent’s position in the argument for the negotiation and that will make you full in the trap of wanting to agree and have a fast end for the situation and that may make your reach a deal that you are not fully satisfied with.
So to avoid that, you have to understand your “bottom line” that means the negotiator should try to protect themselves by having a list of the worst acceptable agreement they could reach. So being able to understand your bottom line that will make you able to understand when you reach the bottom-line list you have to shut your ears and never accept the agreement because that means that you will be losing the negotiation.
And never get beneath agreement of your BATNA. So understanding your bottom line and your BATNA is the most important step for reaching a successful agreement (Fisher et al., 1991, p.99). At the end of the negotiation we have to have a more understanding on how to close the negotiation.
Reference List
Academic Organization. Women & Language, 32(1), 103-112. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Bartáková, H. (2010). Gender Division of Work and the Labor Market Re-entry of the / William Ury. New York: Bantam Books, 1993.
Bazerman, M. H., & Curhan, J. R. (2000). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, Become leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
BOWLES, H., & FLYNN, F. (2010). GENDER AND PERSISTENCE IN NEGOTIATION: Cases. New York, NY: Mc Grow hill companies.
Craver, C. B. (2004). IF WOMEN DON’T ASK: IMPLICATIONS FOR BARGAINING. Czech Women after the Parental Leave. Sociologia, 42(3), 191-212. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Denker, K. J. (2009). Doing Gender in the Academy: The Challenges for Women in the Differences in assertive negotiating are mediated by women’s fear of backlash and attenuated when negotiating on behalf of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 256-267. doi:10.1037/a0017094
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without Giving in / by Roger Fisher and William Ury, with Bruce Patton, editor New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1991. Retrieved from UNIV OF LA VERNE’s Catalog database.
The reason for the negotiation was to avoid a strike and make the management board meet their demand for higher pay and no intrusion in “non activity” time. As a member of the teacher’s union, the role of the negotiation would be to look into the benefit of the teachers.
Worksheet
Questions Discussed
Salary
Teachers’ evaluation
Employment security for teachers
Work load
Benefits
Interests
School Board: The interest of the school board is to maintain its budget and negotiate the best possible salary and benefits with the Teachers’ Union in order to avoid the strike.
Teachers’ Union: The aim of the union is to attain the best possible offer in terms of salary, benefits, working hours, and teachers’ evaluation by receiving a new contract when the school reopens after the summers.
Parents’ Association: Want the schools to function normally and resume its operations on day-to-day basis.
Points of Negotiations
Category
Previous Year
School Board Offer
Resistance Point
Teachers’ Salaries (in $)
15240000
14411500
Higher salary + Higher cost of living +Higher Benefit
Duration of Contract (years)
1
3
1
Work Load
Pupil Ratio 32:1 Duty free time of 25 minutes Prep time
Board wants teachers to do other activities during duty free time
Not willing to do any other activity during the 25 minutes break
Benefits
Fringe benefits
Reduce fringe benefits
Higher paid leave in terms of childcare leave, bereavement leave, and other civic duties
Teachers’ evaluation
No Evaluation
Third party Evaluation + Grant of tenure or layoff depending on evaluation
Representation in evaluation design process + Access to evaluation data + Opportunity to challenge evaluation through official procedure
Employment Security
Lay-off of teachers based on evaluation
Lay-off member should be hired once hiring begins again + 60 days written notice before layoff
Strategies: Compromise/ Accommodate/ Take it or leave it
Tactics: Exchange of information, revealing the data related to wages, leaves, benefits, etc. of school teachers in other districts or states and present a comparison, admit to the problem of resistance and a strike, draw up a written scheme for the negotiation and the demands of the Union, and present the proposed agreement.
Bargaining Mix: Fringe benefits to the teachers
BATNA: Teachers from other schools
Advantage: to attain a greater advantage and a better contract drawn for the teachers that has better pay and better benefits for all.
Disadvantage: This may create a tussle between the management and the union, and this may affect the process of further or latter negotiation.
Concession Points
Increase in salary
Reducing Prep-time and work day
Increase in pupil teacher ratio
Evaluation process of teachers has teacher representation
Layoffs with 60 days written notice
Bargaining Approach
Interests
School Management: The interest of the school management is to enter into a contract with the teachers’ union before the school reopens in order to avoid a strike and keep their costs low.
Teachers Union: The aim of the teachers’ union is to attain the best possible contract with the school management with greater salary, fringe benefits, and higher employment security.
Goal
The main aim of the negotiation process of the teacher’s union is to increase salary, not increase working hours, and have representation in the layoff committee.
The demand of the union is to increase salary, cost of living, or other benefits. Further, the union would resist any increase in the number of hours of activity of the teachers within their working hours. Layoff of teachers without a 60 days written notice period will be resisted by the union.
Strategies
The main strategy of the teachers’ union would be going ahead for collective value creation in order to attain a situation for mutual benefit. The main reason to avoid competitive negotiation, as both the bodies would be working hand in hand for value creation; therefore, a competitive negotiation may spoil the relationship between the two bodies and create further differences.
A negotiation strategy needs to be employed that would help the union to attain the maximum possible demands without hampering the interest of the management. In this respect both aggressive and cooperative negotiation skills must be employed. At certain points negotiation goals are attained to the maximum and the best deal is attained by employing both the competitive and cooperative technique of negotiation.
The process of negotiation that is to be employed would not be restricted to zero-sum, fixed-pie negotiation. The main aim of the strategy would be to employ an integrative negotiation strategy. An integrative negotiation strategy is one that helps in cooperative bargaining.
When a stern or adamant stand cannot be fulfilled and does not become mutually beneficial, a cooperative approach must be employed in order to divide the pie to benefit both the parties. Therefore, this collaborative strategy of negotiation to be employed by the union will entail a win-win situation for both the parties.
In this case study, the teachers’ union wants to attain a higher salary across all bases, increase in fringe benefits, and ensuring their free time and leaves. However, the school management intends to reduce the salary of the teachers, increase work hours in order to increase productivity and layoff teachers who are not evaluated as good in order to do away with their liabilities such that they have fewer losses.
Apparently, the interests of both the parties are contradictory, and if a competitive and aggressive stand is taken, like a strike, it would simply aggravate the situation, instead of drawing a solution. However, the collaborative process would ensure that both the parties agree upon certain points to a mutually beneficial degree and therefore, attain the best possible options.
The teachers’ union already knows that the management wants to cut costs, and therefore would likely assort to reducing benefits, increasing workload, and layoffs, as direct reduction of salary would aggravate the union.
However, the union has other demands that would make the employment of the teachers more secure, increase their salary in accordance to the increase in cost of living, and increasing their benefits and employment security. However, the union is ready to compromise on certain issues such as increasing work hours or pupil-teacher ratio, or reduction of prep time for teachers.
Compromise provides greater power to the negotiator and helps the negotiation when they commence with an opening offer .
However, the union is ready to take an aggressive stand and call a strike if some of their unconditional demands are not met such as no changing of free time usage, layoff rules, and changes in teacher evaluation process. Therefore, an integrative bargaining process would help in creation of value for both parties and help towards a mutually beneficial outcome .
Tactics
First the Union must sets its bargaining range high. As conceded by Churchman . Therefore, the union will first divulge their bargaining range on three levels – “optimistic, realistic, and deadlock” . This would help the union to get the maximum possible power during the negotiation process. Then the tactics of the union would be to present the management with a realistic bargain.
When a fair point of the bargaining would be reached, which many theorists believe as the mid-point of the bargaining range, a substantial outcome would be reached.
Then the last tactics to close the deadlock would be on part of the union to provide to the management their “best and final” offer that would entail the maximum compromising points that the union was willing to do away with in order to reach an agreement. This compromise would demonstrate the union’s willingness for negotiation and the genuine intent to reach an agreement.
Bargaining Mix
The bargaining mix of the union would be based on the increase of salary of the teachers, and across all bases and increase cost of living allowances.
Then the second issue would be the new evaluation process in which teachers’ union representation is called for and the evaluation process should be framed in such a way that if required the data of the evaluation can be accessed by the teachers and they could contest the evaluation outcome if not satisfied.
The third point of bargaining was reduction of workload and the fourth was the increase of fringe benefits as demanded by the teachers’ union.
BATNA
The BATNA of the teachers’ union is to have higher employment security for the teachers and better work terms and higher salary for the teachers. The main aim of the teachers union was to attain higher employment security for the teachers as the management was devising a plan to lay off teachers with the introduction of the new third party evaluation process in a hassle free way.
Further, the union also wanted to ensure the employability of the teachers who are laid-off by pushing the management to hire them when hiring is started again. The BATNA of the teachers’ union would not be set any higher as in many cases parties try to fix a very high BATNA and fail to attain it or lower it within the right time. This may spoil chances of optimum negotiation outcome.
Negotiation Terms
Beginning Offer
The main offer of the union would be to increase the cost of living allowance of the teachers’ salary. The second would be to keep the break time of 50 minutes unchanged. The third would be to allow a member of the union to be in the evaluation committee such that he or she is in the process of formulation of the evaluation criteria.
Further, no layoffs should be allowed without a written notice of 2 months. If any lay-off is done wrongfully, the union will have the right to contest it and challenge it. Further, the union would also make an initial offer to increase the benefits of the teachers in terms of increase of some of their paid leaves as in childcare leave.
Target Point
The target of the union was to attain a higher cost of living salary for the teachers, reduce layoffs an increase the employment security. Further, they also wanted to ensure higher benefits for the teachers.
Further, they wanted union member’s representation in the evaluation committee in order to have some control over the evaluation scheme, process, and data. Further, they were looking for increasing paid leave for the teachers over and above what existed. Further, the union was aiming for a contract of 1 year.
Resistance Point
The points at which the union would put up a resistance were increasing the cost of living allowance. The other demands would include inclusion of a union member in the evaluation committee, access of evaluation data to the teachers, and an official process to contest the outcome of the evaluation.
The union is unwilling to reduce the duty free time or incorporate any addition service during that period of 25 minutes. The union wants additional 2-day bereavement leave for the death of spouse’s parents, paid leave in case they are detailed for any civic duty.
Concession Points
Lay offs
The union is ready to support lay off as long as they are done in accordance with the proposed process of 60 days in advance written intimation. As long as their demand for agitation against uncalled for layoffs is met. Further, minimal layoff must be followed in any situation.
Salary
The union demanded $2250 across the board increase in salary. However, they are not adamant on increase in the overall salary and other allowances and are willing to accept certain concessions.
Teacher Evaluation
The teachers are not opposed to the concept of teacher evaluation as long as they have full representation in the evaluation committee and process.
Workload
The teachers were willing to allow for an increase in the workload of the teachers in terms of increase in pupil teacher ratio, reduction of prep-time, etc.
References
Beersma, B. & de Dreu, C., 2002. Integrative and Distributive Negotiation in Small Groups: Effects of Task Structure, Decision Rule, and Social Motive. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes , 87(2), pp.227-52.
Brett, J.M., 2007. Negotiating globally: how to negotiate deals, resolve disputes, and make. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley and Sons.
Churchman, D., 1995. Negotiation: process, tactics, theory. Boston, MA: University Press of America.
Fisher, R. & Ury, W., 1981. Getting to yes. New York: Penguine.
Gosselin, T., 2007. Practical negotiating: tools, tactics, & techniques. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
Guasco, M.P. & Robinson, P.R., 2007. Principles of negotiation: strategies, tactics, techniques to reach agreements. Toronto, Canada: Entrepreneur Press.
Straus, D., 2003. Facilitated Collaborative Problem Solving and Process Management. In L. Hall, ed. Negotiation: strategies for mutual gain. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. pp.28-40.