Conflict and Negotiation Final – Flashcards
Unlock all answers in this set
Unlock answersquestion
aka distributive bargaining, zero-sum bargaining, en-lose bargaining The idea that somebody has to win at the expense of someone else Rewards are seen as a "fixed pie" to be distributed between the parties Substance only; the substance of what is being traded is the only real concern The relationship between the people is unimportant--to show concern for the other person is to show weakness that may be taken advantage of
answer
Competitive Negotiation
question
Less than optimal, but in situations where an ongoing relationship is not an issue, competitive negotiations are perfectly acceptable and strong
answer
How is competitive negotiation viewed?
question
Prepare: need to know goals (exactly what you want and are asking for), make sure your expectations are based on real figures/info, research before you begin negotiating, check your assumptions often (how do I know this is true?) ---know your BATNA Engage: make a personal connection with the other party, if they see you as a person it will be harder for them to be tough on you, don't go straight into substance of negotiation Frame: try to get them to your end of the spectrum, make negotiation a story, framing negotiations psychologically conditions the other party to accept your premise and makes them more likely to move in your direction, whichever party gets the other to buy their stories controls the negotiation Engaging creates an affinity, framing creates a story that changes the value
answer
3 things to do in competitive negotiation
question
Zone of Possible Agreement Range, based on expectations, with which you can make a deal If small, it may be challenging to reach agreement If ZOPA is large, your challenge is to place yourself in the zone as favorably as possible
answer
ZOPA
question
Know your walkaway---determined by value of alternatives Set your expectations high (aggressive target) Goal--be right at the edge If you don't know where the zone ends, guess extreme
answer
Elements of ZOPA
question
If I increase/decrease my number by a certain dollar figure or percentage, you should do the same
answer
Rule of reciprocity
question
1) Negotiators face some interdependent situations that are distributive, and to do well in them they need to understand how they work 2) Many people use distributive bargaining almost exclusively, so negotiators need to understand how to counter their effects 3) Every negotiation situation has the potential to require distributive bargaining skills when at the "claiming value" stage
answer
3 reasons why every negotiator should be familiar with distributive bargaining, according to Lewicki
question
When a negotiator wants to maximize the value obtained in a single deal When the relationship with the other party is not overly important When they are at the claiming value stage of negotiations. (skills are transferrable) Helps you understand the minds of people who do this
answer
When are distributive bargaining strategies useful?
question
target point: the point at which the negotiator would like to conclude negotiations (sometimes referred to as negotiator's "aspirations") resistance point: a negotiator's bottom line, or the point at which they are indifferent to a deal--should be kept secret (aka reservation price) asking price: the initial price set by the seller *Both parties should establish target points, resistance points, and asking price before the negotiation begins* bargaining zone: aka ZOPA --positive bargaining zone: when the buyer's resistance point is above the seller's --negative bargaining zone: the buyer won't pay more than the seller will minimally accept
answer
Elements of Distributive Bargaining
question
The negotiating world is controlled by egocentric self-interest The underlying motivation is competitive/antagonistic Limited resources prevail One can make independent choices: tomorrow's decision remains unaffected materially by today's The resource distribution system is distributive in nature (either/or) The goal is to win as much as you can--and especially more than the other side
answer
Basic assumptions of competitive negotiation
question
Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement Alternatives are important because they give negotiators the power to walk away from any negotiation when the emerging deal isn't very good
answer
BATNA
question
Fundamental process of distributive bargaining: to reach a settlement within a positive bargaining zone Objective of both parties: to obtain as much of the zone as possible--to reach an agreement as close to the other party's resistance point as possible For agreement to occur, both parties must believe the settlement is the best they can get
answer
Settlement Point
question
1) Discovering the other party's resistance point 2) Influencing the other party's resistance point --the value the other attaches to a particular outcome --the costs the other attaches to delay or difficulty in negotiations --the costs the other attaches to having the negotiation aborted
answer
Two tasks important in all distributive bargaining
question
The observation that people who make decisions under certain conditions are influenced by initial starting numbers.
answer
Anchoring effect
question
Gives the negotiator room for movement and allows them to learn about the other party's priorities Acts as a metamessage and the other party may get the impression that there's a long way to go before a reasonable settlement is achieved--more concessions than originally intended will need to be made, and the other may have incorrectly estimated their resistance point
answer
2 reasons why an ambitious opening offer is advantageous
question
It may be summarily rejected by the other party It communicates an attitude of toughness that may be harmful to long-term relationships
answer
2 disadvantages to an ambitious opening offer
question
Creates empathy--mirrorneurons (cause other person to pick up on your pain and feel it themselves) don't work if its someone we don't know of if they're doing something we don't recognize --anger also inhibits empathy Creates an emotional narrative (shifts their expectations) Builds affiliation--the more you can play that up, the harder it will be for them
answer
Why is it important to build personal connection during competitive negotiation?
question
The "third side"--those most affected by the outcome The American people--they have the most to lose
answer
Obama article--most important element in reaching resolution between two sides in difficult matters
question
To settle a dispute by discussion and mutual agreement All efforts by individual disputants to resolve conflicts for themselves, without third-party intervention Can be either competitive or integrative
answer
Negotiation
question
Problem resolution Partial resolution Impasse Outcome can be an improved relationship as long as the decisions reached are satisfactory.
answer
Possible outcomes of a negotiation
question
The parties recognize their interdependence They are willing to work both on incompatible and overlapping goals They can talk to each other in a problem-solving way
answer
Negotiation occurs in a conflict when:
question
Participants engage in the conflict rather than avoiding Parties resist using domination, or power-over tactics (if they're using integrative bargaining) Parties use persuasive communication tactics in a variety of styles Parties have reached an active, problem-solving phase in which specific proposals are traded
answer
Negotiation presumes:
question
Contemporary Western Culture has contradicting messages about negotiation --you're supposed to get a "good deal" --you are expected to walk into commercial establishments and pay the listed prices Some items are negotiable and others are not--each culture designates areas that are off limits to negotiation and areas in which negotiation is acceptable. Latino norms urge negotiators to be more concerned about fairness for the other party (one party wins, other loses is considered failure)
answer
Negotiation and Culture
question
One of the main communication skills needed to negotiate effectively You can offer forceful opinions about an issue, yet protect the face/identity of the people involved. Test ideas, not people 4 things you should do in an argument: 1) State what you are claiming 2) Present evidence for your claim 3) Present reasons for your claim 4) Summarize to show what you've established
answer
Argumentation
question
1) Use principles of argumentation with compassion 2) Reaffirm your opponent's sense of competence 3) Allow opponents to finish what they're saying 4) Emphasize equality 5) Emphasize shared attitudes 6) Show opponents you're interested in their views 7) Use a somewhat subdued, calm delivery 8) Control the pace of the argument 9) Allow your opponent to save face
answer
9 things an arguer should do to make a case, while supporting the other TRIP dimensions
question
Argument against the man Attacking the other debater personally---considered a logical fallacy in professional debate circles
answer
Argumentum ad hominum
question
When arguing about public issues, parties tend to enjoy it more and not be so ego-involved as when arguing about their personal relationship
answer
How do we respond differently in negotiating a public issue or a personal issue in a relationship?
question
Win/lose perspective--usually adopted by amateurs "Series of compromises"--negotiation is simply a tradeoff in which each gives up something to reach a middle ground, the development of creative options is ignored...aka negotiated compromise Formal negotiations between negotiating representatives in which the beginnings and endings of negotiations are clearly delineated
answer
Approaches to negotiation that have a limited view
question
Has strong bias toward confrontation, encourages use of coercion and emotional pressure as persuasive means; hard on relationships--creates mistrust, anger, feeling of separateness Works against responsiveness and openness to opponent--restricts access to joint gains Encourages brinkmanship--creates many opportunities for impasse Increases difficulty in predicting responses of opponent because reliance is on manipulation and confrontation to control process Contributes to an overestimation of the payoffs of competitive actions such as litigation because the focus is not on a relatively objective analysis of substantive merits
answer
Disadvantages of competitive negotiation
question
AKA collaborative bargaining Assumes that parties have both diverse interests and common interests and that the negotiation process can result in both parties gaining something Characterized by mixed motives, separate needs, and interdependent needs Assumes that creativity can transcend the win/lose aspect of competitive negotiations
answer
Integrative negotiation
question
People holding opposite positions are not necessarily in conflict The negotiating world is controlled by enlightened self-interest Common interests are valued and sought Interdependence is recognized and enhanced Limited resources do exist, but they can usually be expanded through cooperation The resource distribution system is integrative (joint) in nature The goal is a mutually agreeable solution that is fair to all parties and efficient for the community
answer
Assumptions in collaborative negotiation
question
Actively attempt to structure an "even playing field", a level table-balanced power Not always possible, sometimes must decide whether to leave the table
answer
Most basic task of integrative bargaining
question
Requires a high order of intelligence, keen perception and discrimination, and a brilliant inventiveness Strongly biased toward cooperation, creating internal pressures to compromise and accommodate that may not be in one's best interests Increases vulnerability to deception and manipulation by a competitive opponent Increases difficulty of establishing definite aspiration levels and bottom lines because of the reliance on qualitative (value-laden) goals
answer
Disadvantages of integrative bargaining
question
Negotiation on merits, an approach to collaborative negotiation created by Fisher and Ury Four points: 1) Separate the people from the problem--be soft on people, hard on problem --traditional negotiation is looking at other person as opponent, principled negotiation is looking at other person as conflict partner 2) Focus on interests, not positions: My position is what I say I want, my interest is what I need, what I'm concerned about (why i want it) --orange story 3) Invent options for mutual gain--aka "expand the pie" --look for other ways to enhance the value of the thing you're talking about (what can you add to make people happy? 17 camels) 4) Insist on objective criteria--removes it from the person --prepare/do research
answer
Principled negotiation
question
Experience it 50% stronger than they do with gains/wins $20 bid
answer
How do our brains experience loss?
question
Each side takes a position, argues for it, and then makes concessions to reach a compromise Fisher and Ury's term for competitive negotiation
answer
Positional bargaining
question
It should produce a wise agreement if agreement is possible It should be efficient It should improve (or at least not damage) the relationship between the parties
answer
3 criteria for fair negotiation
question
Soft and hard Soft negotiation: Emphasizes importance of building and maintaining a relationship, tends to be efficient (produces results quickly), but may not be wise because it runs the risk of producing a sloppy agreement hard negotiation: dominates
answer
2 types of positional bargaining
question
1) Do it right back ("tit-for-tat") 2) Call them out on it (acknowledge, say "I know you're doing x, let's do this the win-win way") 3) Co-opt the other party (go back to engaging, remind them of your connection) 4) Ignore them (continue to negotiate in a principled way)
answer
4 things you can do if you want collaborative negotiation and the other person wants competitive negotiation
question
Positional bargaining doesn't tend to produce good or lasting agreements because it tends to neglect the parties' true interests Positional bargaining encourages stubbornness or an escalation to commitment--people become personally invested in their positions regardless of whether or not they make sense so they tend to harm parties' relationships It's inefficient--a lot of time is wasted on haggling
answer
Flaws of traditional negotiation, according to Fisher and Ury
question
When talk is sarcastic, indirect, or defensive
answer
When is there a need for third parties?
question
Informal: helping friends, coworkers, or family members Formal: using coaches, mediators, counselors, arbitrators, and courts
answer
Two types of third party intervention
question
Someone who is trained in intervention and doesn't have a vested interest in a specific outcome
answer
Skilled third party
question
Transform conflict elements: -Change style of expression in conflict -Alter the degree of interdependence between the parties -Change their perceptions or their goals so they're not seen as incompatible -Balance power -Modify the actual or perceived scarcity of resources -Adjust the actual or perceived interference by the opposing parties
answer
Goals of third party
question
1) Are they ready for a third party? 2) How do you know they want your help? 3) What skills prepare you to help them? 4) Are you biased, committed to one of the parties, or unable to help because of time/position/other matters? 5) Can you say no? (If not, you're too involved in the conflict)
answer
Questions to answer before intervening
question
private adjudication, paying a person to make a decision based on the facts of a case Disadvantages: -Final, binding: when arbitrator writes the decision, there's no going back -Only thing that allows you to return a decision is failure to consider potentially relevant evidence, or there is a clear conflict of interest Advantages: -private -you can pick your judge -scheduled based on your availability
answer
Arbitration
question
Public adjudication--going to court Costly (both money and energy) Judges decide on laws, not on what's best for your life
answer
Litigation
question
Representation without litigation, involves 2 collaborative attorneys and two clients, at the outset of the case they sign an agreement saying they'll be fair and open with each other, and if at any point they need a judge, collaborative law is over Takes away perceived incentive to notch up hostility in a case
answer
Collaborative Law
question
Facilitated negotiation, parties select a mediator based on their experience and background 5 principles: 1) Voluntariness (parties must enter freely into mediation, have right to withdraw) 2) Neutrality (mediator can't give one person more time/attention than the other, can't take sides, needs to treat both equally) 3) Informed Consent (Affirms parties' right to information about the mediation process, and their legal rights/options before consenting to participate in mediation or consenting to any of the terms of an agreement reached in mediation) 4) Confidentiality (won't affect court proceedings, you have to lay all your cards on the table to resolve something) 5) Self-Determination (parties have the right to define their issues, needs and solutions, and to determine the outcome of the mediation process. It's the responsibility of the parties to mutually decide the terms of an agreement reached in mediation)
answer
Mediation
question
Facilitative Mediation: You recognize people as being competent, just need a little help--mediator makes no suggestions (traditional form of mediation) Evaluative Mediation: Mediator has higher level of participation, job is to get settlement, points out strengths/weaknesses of each side's argument Transformative mediation: What diplomacy looks like, based on idea that mediation has the potential to generate transformative effects----mediators try to enforce importance of autonomy and self-determination (little interference)
answer
3 styles of mediation
question
Social brain is in its natural habitat when we're speaking with someone face to face Problem with communicating on the web: it has no channel for the social brain to attend to (no emotional signal in real time)
answer
Can we be emotionally intelligent online? (Goleman)
question
Media richness: the capacity of any given media to supply "contextual cues"--body language, facial expressions, tone of voice, etc (face to face communication is considered a rich medium) Interactivity: The potential of the medium to sustain a seamless flow of info between two or more negotiators
answer
Two dimensions of communication media
question
We used to think of it as being two countries negotiating over one thing that affects them both Lines have become blurred, but still very personal in nature--example: two religious groups negotiating in the same country can still be international negotiation Track one vs track two diplomacy: --track one: photo ops (government) --track two: what change is based on (citizens), involves everything but figureheads
answer
David Matz--International Negotiation
question
Emotional correctness matters more than political correctness --tone, feeling, how we say things, respect and compassion we show each other Political persuasion begins with emotional correctness You can be politically correct and emotionally wrong Challenge: find compassion for others that we want them to have for us
answer
Sally Kohn Ted Talk
question
Negotiators are always going to feel a side---impossible to put emotions aside
answer
Dan Shapiro on "affiliations"
question
We're hardwired to be compassionate and relate to each other (because of mirror neurons)
answer
Daniel Goleman Ted Talk
question
Emotions set actions into motion, leading to your own unique subjective experience--emotions are subjective (we experience them as good or bad) Feelings are facts -not right or wrong, they simply exist -caution against saying "I know how you feel", instead say "I can imagine how you're feeling" We can't be in conflict and not experience emotional upheaval Emotional events trigger responses--we realize we are in conflict when we feel something uncomfortable
answer
Emotions in Conflict
question
They hinder decision making Emotions are irrational Emotions are for the weak/powerless If you "let go" of emotions you'll lose control If other people express emotions, you have a responsibility to "do something"
answer
Misconceptions about emotions in conflict
question
Hard, closed or negative emotions Positive, vulnerable or pro-social emotions
answer
Two categories of emotions
question
Anger Fear and Anxiety Sadness Disgust, Contempt, or Revulsion Shame and Guilt
answer
Negative emotions associated with conflict
question
Functions: -can alert us to a perception that our safety or core values are threatened -Can help motivate us into action about a threat or bad situation -Can help us set boundaries when they need to be set Anger vs Aggression: anger is a feeling connected to a personal unfairness or injustice, aggression is a personal attack
answer
Anger
question
Functions: -Leads us first to avoid but also sometimes to "freeze" (a disabling of the physical and emotional system that keeps us from responding) -Sometimes the period of freeze can provide us with time to create a reasoned response rather than give into our "flight" tendencies Anger-fear sequence: Fear and hurt make us feel vulnerable, which we often experience or at least express in the form of anger---we perceive a threat that brings up fear in us that we express as anger toward the person/situation that we believe threatens us
answer
Fear and Anxiety
question
Functions: -Can strengthen social bonds (e.g. death of a loved one) -Can help us build a bridge of empathy to another person -Communicates that there is trouble in a relationship that needs to be addressed (unrelieved sadness can lead to anger) Gender difference: Women express sadness and cover anger, men express anger and cover sadness
answer
Sadness
question
Functions: -Moves us to get rid of something toxic in our lives
answer
Disgust, Contempt or Revulsion
question
Functions: Alert us to the fact that we've acted in a way that is inconsistent with our own standards, idea of self and values
answer
Shame and Guilt
question
If people like each other in a work setting they are more likely to choose cooperative modes of conflict resolution--this is the idea behind team building exercises Community conflict resolution and transformation create a "positive spiral" that makes people feel shared pride and gratitude (e.g. volunteer work, helping others) We can even feel better, more joyful by merely witnessing good deeds When people feel emotions like joy, hope, empathy, altruism...they are more likely to think creatively and be more open to new ideas and info, less likely to be closed, distrusting and conflictual Positive emotions lead to empathy and sympathy--a "higher self" and allow us to work together with others to solve problems rather than viewing others as the problem
answer
Value of Positive Emotions in Conflict Resolution
question
Don't be emotional, don't worry, never let them see you sweat. Problematic because: --In relationships, our ability to affiliate and engage with someone depends on our ability to recognize and express our emotions and to recognize others' emotions (emotional intelligence) --Negotiation takes place within a relationship, a context in which emotions inevitably arise
answer
Problematic messages regarding emotions
question
1) Emotions affect our abilities to reach negotiation goals 2) Emotions are a means to communicate relational identity concerns 3) Parties can further their negotiation goals through explicit negotiation of emotions and relational identity concerns
answer
Shapiro's Three Main Points
question
Topic: What do I want? Relational: Who are we to each other? Identity: Who am I in this situation? Process: How are we going to talk about this?
answer
TRIP Goals
question
X axis: binding process--->non-binding process Y axis: Degree of client control/self-determination (how much input do I have?) Options (in order) Arbitration, Litigation, Collaborative Law, Mediation, Negotiation
answer
ADR Spectrum
question
Designate one of your demands as a "precondition"...so you've already won something going in Appear irrational Claim you don't have the authority to compromise Get personal-belittle the other side's proposals Forbearance aka "the stall"--wait the other side out Fait Accompli aka "done deal"--make your move regardless Trial Balloon: float a position, "what if..." Feinting aka "the artful dodge"--change topics
answer
Competitive Negotiation Tactics
question
Let the other side give you the first number, unless you feel you have a sense of where they should be and you want to reset their expectations Never say yes to the first offer--it's never their best, and you may insult them Make small concessions and be able to justify them Don't offer a range of prices--the other person is only going to hear the price they want to hear Hold something small, "a sweetener", back to throw in when you are very close to making a deal but the other side can't close (if it wasn't a good deal before the sweetener, it's not a good deal) Be willing to walk away (most important)
answer
Tips in Competitive Negotiation
question
Open up communication Create an opportunity for mutual understanding Create a safe atmosphere for open communication and fresh ideas Encourage people to reexamine their own thinking and assumptions Reach a resolution
answer
Goals of Mediation
question
The decision to reduce the negative thoughts, effects, and behavior---such as blame and anger--toward an offender or hurtful situation, and to begin to gain better understanding of the offense and the offender. Apology is a step toward forgiveness
answer
What is forgiveness? How is this different from an apology?
question
Forgiveness is therapeutic, has a healthy effect Has physiological, psychological and emotional impact on us Releases negative feelings and helps us move on
answer
Why would we want to forgive someone who has hurt or victimized us?
question
Physical harm aside, people harm each other by what they do and don't do, and by what they say and don't say. Examples: Accusations, threats, judgments, lies, omissions Brains process emotional injury same as physical injury
answer
What is there to forgive?
question
It minimizes/dismisses the offense--you're not absolving the offender and pretending it didn't happen, forgiveness acknowledges the truth about what happened and the consequences that followed. Forgiveness is indifferent about justice--term "restorative justice" (facing victims, talking/listening to them), it might hold someone accountable and seek restitution or a form of reparation while releasing the resentment that often accompanies unresolved conflict. Forgiveness is a sign of weakness--Requires people to be able to look forward (very hard) Forgive and forget is the best thing to do--dangerous conduction: memory is absolutely essential to forgiveness since it's central to the identity of the individual, and it may reduce the susceptibility to repeated injury in the future
answer
Misconceptions about forgiveness
question
Science because it has elements that need to be there Art because it has to be genuine and delivered with sincerity
answer
Apology is both an art and a science
question
Detailed account of situation, so there's a shared understanding of what happened Acknowledgment of hurt/damage done--validates feelings of victim and legitimizes their reaction Take responsibility and recognize your role in the event--no "I'm sorry but.." A statement of regret (I'm sorry, I feel badly that i hurt you, I apologize) A promise that it won't happen again--future piece to not repeat hurtful behavior A form of restitution when possible (e.g. replacing something you broke) Ask for forgiveness--gives power back to victim (this is key)
answer
Elements of an apology
