Unit 4 -NC

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

1/59

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

2/59

HOW PEOPLECOMMUNICATE IN

NEGOTIATION ? The research has examined diferent aspectso how people communicate in negotiation.We address two aspects related to the "how"o communication: the characteristics olanguage that communicators use, and theselection o a communication channel orsending and receiving messages.

3

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

3/59


NEGOTIATION ?language operates at two levels: the logicallevel ( or proposals or ofers and thepragmatic level (semantics, s!ntax, andst!le . The meaning conve!ed ! aproposition or statement is a com ination oone logical, sur ace message and severalpragmatic (i.e., hinted or in erred messages.#n other words, it is not onl! what is said andhow it is said that matters ut also what

additional, veiled, or su sur ace in ormation isintended, conve ed, or erceived in rece tion $

Use of Language

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

4/59


NEGOTIATION ?1. The use o polarized language, in whichnegotiators use positive words when speakingo their own positions (e.g., generous,reasona le, or even%handed and negativewords when re erring to the other part!&sposition (e.g., tight%'sted, unreasona le, orheav!%handed .

Use of Language

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

5/59


NEGOTIATION ?). The conve!ance o ver al immediac! (ameasure o intended immediac!, urgenc!, orrelative ps!chological distance , either highand intended to engage or compel the otherpart! ("*+a!, here is the deal" or "# ta+e great

care to ... " or low and intended to create asense o distance or aloo ness ("Well, there itis" or "*ne should ta+e great care to ... " .

Use of Language

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

6/59


NEGOTIATION ?3. The degree o language intensit!, in whichhigh intensit! conve!s strong eelings to the

recipient.(as with statements o a-rmation orthe re uent use o pro anit! and lowintensit! conve!s wea+ eelings.

/

Use of Language

$. The degree o lexical diversit! (0e., the

command o a road, rich voca ular! , wherehigh levels o lexical diversit! denote com ortand competence with language, and lowlevels denote discom ort, anxiet!, or

inexperience.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

7/59


NEGOTIATION ?. The extent o high%power language st!le,with low power denoted ! the use o ver alhedges, hesitations, or politeness to the pointo de erence and su ordination, and highpower denoted ! ver al dominance, clarit!and 'rmness o expression, and sel %assurance

Use of Language

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

8/59


NEGOTIATION ?the +e! variation that distinguishes onecommunicationchannel rom another is social presence 2thea ilit! o a channel to carr! and conve! su tlesocial cues rom sender to receiver that goe!ond the literal "text" o the message itsel .or example, as an alternative to ace to%ace interaction, the telephone preservesone&s a ilit! to transmit social cues through

in4ection or tone o voice, ut or eits thea ilit to communicate throu h acial 5

ection of a Co!!unication Channe

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

9/59


NEGOTIATION ?#n written communication, there are onl! thewords and s!m ols on paper, although one&schoice o words and the wa! the! arearranged can certainl! conve! tone,(in ormalit!, and emotion. 6%mail, as anincreasingl! u i uitous mode o personal andorgani7ational communication, can e viewedas simpl! another orm o writtencommunication that happens to involve

electronic transmission. 18


8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

10/59


NEGOTIATION ? Treating e%mail as 9ust another vehicle orwritten communication is anal!ticall!simplistic ecause e%mail interactionsre uentl! su stitute or communication thatwould otherwise occur via telephone, ace%to%ace, or perhaps not at all. esearchers haveeen examining the efects o channels ingeneral, and e%mail in particular, onnegotiation processes and outcomes during

much o the past decade. 11


8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

11/59


NEGOTIATION ?;n ortunatel!, there are ew consistent'ndings that point to clear efects. We do+now that interacting parties can more easil!develop personal rapport in ace%to% acecommunication compared to other channelsand at ace%to% ace negotiators are moreinclined to disclose in ormation truth ull!,#ncreasing their a ilit! to attain mutual gain.

There is evidence that negotiation through

written channels is more li+el! to end inim asse than ne otiation that occurs ace%to%1)


8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

12/59

I!"#o$ing Co!!unicationIn Negotiation%

Three main techni ues have een proposedor improving communication in negotiation:the use o uestions, listening, and role

reversal.

13

The Use of &uestions

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

13/59

I!"#o$ing Co!!unicationIn Negotiation%=anagea le uestions cause attention orprepare the other person&s thin+ing or urtheruestions ("=a! # as+ !ou a uestion>" , getin ormation ("?ow much will this cost>" , andgenerate thoughts ("@o !ou have an!suggestions or improving this>" .

;nmanagea le uestions cause di-cult!,give in ormation ("@idn&t !ou now that wecouldn&t aford this>" , and ring thediscussion to a alse conclusion ("@onAt !ou

thin+ we&ve tal+ed a out this enough>" . 1$

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

14/59

1

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

15/59

1

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

16/59


1/

ListeningBounselors recogni7e that communicationsare re uentl! loaded with multiple meanings

and that the counselor must tr! to identi !these diferent meanings without ma+ing thecommunicator angr! or de ensive. There arethree ma9or orms o listening:#. Passi$e istening involves receiving themessage while providing no eed ac+ to thesender a out the accurac! or completeness oreception. Cometimes passive listening is itselenough to +eep a communicator sendingin ormation. Come people li+e to tal+ and are

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

17/59


1

Listening). Ac'no( e)g!ent is the second orm olistening, slightl! more active than passivelistening. When ac+nowledging, receiversoccasionall! nod their heads, maintain e!econtact, or inter9ect responses li+e "# see," "=m%hmm," "#nteresting,D " eall!," "Cure:& "Eo on,"and the li+e.3. Acti$e istening is the third orm o listening.When receivers are activel! listening, the!restate or paraphrase the sender&s message intheir own language. Sen)e#* Flease, don&t as+me a out that now. +ecei$e#* Counds li+e !ou&reaw ull! us! right now.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

18/59


15

+o e +e$e#sa

ole%reversal techni ues allow negotiators tounderstand more completel! the other part!&spositions ! activel! arguing these positionsuntil the other part! is convinced that he orshe is understood. or example, someone canas+ !ou how !ou would respond to thesituation that he or she is in. #n doing so, !oucan come to understand that person&sposition, perhaps can come to accept its

validit!, and can discover how to modi ! oth

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

19/59


)8

+o e +e$e#sa1. ole reversal is efective in producingcognitive changes (greater understanding o

the other part!&s position and attitudechanges (perceived similarities etween thetwo positions .). When the parties& positions areundamentall! compati le with each other,role reversal is li+el! to produce accepta leresults (cognitive and attitudinal change Gwhen the parties& positions are undamentall!

incompati le, role reversal ma! sharpen theerce tions o incom ati ilit and inhi it

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

20/59


)1

+o e +e$e#sa

3.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

21/59

Negotiation

"o(e#

))

an actor ... has power in a given situation(situational power to the degree that he can

satis ! the purposes (goals, desires, or wantsthat he is attempting to ul'll in that situation.Po(e# is a #e ationa conce"t G it does notreside in the individual ut rather in the

relationship o the person to his environment. Thus, the power o an actor in a givensituation is determined ! thecha#acte#istics of the situation as well as! his o(n cha#acte#istics,

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

22/59

Negotiation

"o(e#

)3

@uring economic downswings, la or unionscan 'nd themselves negotiating new contractsthat dela! wage increases or even reducewages, which means giving hard%wonconcessions ac+ to management%hardl!something union o-cials want to do. The!

have usuall! done so when compan! o-cialshave argued that unless wages go down. the'rm will la!of thousands o emplo!ees, moveoperations to another countr!, drop a line o

usiness, or ta+e some similar action.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

23/59

Negotiation

"o(e#

)$

The union o-cials can e seen as ma+ing arational or calculated decision to dosomething the! ordinaril! would not do(@ahl&C de'nition , ut in this casemanagementis simpl! ta+ing advantage o the shi t in

power within the economic environillent.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

24/59

Negotiation

"o(e#

)

rench and aven (15 5 identi'ed 've ma9ort!pes: expert power, reward power, coercivepower, legitimate power, and re erent power.

SOU+CES O POWE+-HOWPEOPLE AC&UI+E POWE+

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

25/59

)

Coe#ci$e Po(e#Fower that is ased on ear. *ne reacts to thispower ase out o ear o the negative resultsthat might occur i one ails to compl!. #t restson the application, or the threat o theapplication, o ph!sical sanctions such as thein4iction o pain, the generation o rustration

through restriction o movement, or the controlling ! orce o asicph!siological or sa et! needs.

Negot at on

"o(e#

N

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

26/59

)/

Coe#ci$e Po(e#

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

27/59

)

+e(a#) Po(e# The opposite o coercive power is rewardpower. Feople will go along with the wishes ordirectives o another i doing so producespositive ene'tsG there ore, one who candistri ute rewards that others view as valua lewill have power over those others. #n anorgani7ational context, we thin+ o mone!,avoura le per ormance appraisals,promotions, interesting wor+ assignments,riendl! colleagues, important in ormation, and

pre erred wor+ shi ts or sales territories.

Negot at on

"o(e#

N

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

28/59

)5

Legiti!ate Po(e# The most re uent access to one or more othe ases o power is through a personIsstructural position. This is called legitimatepower. #t represents the power a personreceives as a result o his or her position in theormal hierarch! o an organi7ation. Fositionso authorit! include coercive and rewardpowers. 0egitimate power, however, is roaderthan the power to coerce and reward.Cpeci'call!, it includes acceptance !

mem ers o an organi7ation o the authorit! oa osition.

Negot at on

"o(e#

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

29/59

38

E."e#t Po(e#6xpert power is in4uence ased on expertise,special s+ills, or +nowledge. 6xpertise hasecome one o the most power ul sources oin4uence as the world has ecome moretechnologicall! oriented. =ost o us ollow theadvice that our doctors give us. 6xpert power

relies on trust that all relevant in ormation isgiven out honestl! and completel!. * course,since +nowledge is power, the more thatin ormation is shared, the less expert power a

person has.

ego a on

"o(e#

N

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

30/59

31

+efe#ent Po(e#e erent power develops out o admiration oanother and a desire to e li+e that person. #!ou admire someone to the point o modelling!our ehaviour and attitudes a ter him or her,that person possesses re erent power over !ou.Cometimes teachers and coaches have

re erent power ecause o our admiration othem. e erent power explains wh! cele ritiesare paid millions o dollars to endorse productsin commercials.

Negot at on

"o(e#

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

31/59

3)

Info#!ation Po(e##n ormation power comes rom access to andcontrol over in ormation. Feople in anorgani7ation who have data or +nowledge thatothers need can ma+e those others dependenton them. =anagers, or instance, ecause otheir access to privileged sales, cost, salar!,

pro't, and similar data, can use thisin ormation to control and shape su ordinatesIehaviour.

ego a on

"o(e#

N i i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

32/59

Negotiation

"o(e#

33

The accumulation and presentation o dataintended to change the other person&s point oview or position on an issueG and ( orexpertise an ac+nowledged accumulation o

in ormation, or master! o a od! oin ormation, on a particular pro lem or issue.

/- Po(e# 0ase) on Info#!ationan) E."e#tise

N i i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

33/59

Negotiation

"o(e#

3$

The accumulation o mone!, raw material,la or, time, and e uipment that can e usedas incentives to encourage compliance or aspunishments or noncompliance.

1- Po(e# 0ase) on Cont#oo$e# #esou#ces

N i i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

34/59

Negotiation

"o(e#

3

Fower derived rom eing located in aparticular position in an organi7ational orcommunication structureG leads to twodiferent +inds o leverage:J ormal authorit!, derived rom occup!ing a+e! position in a hierarchical organi7ation.J

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

35/59

+e ationshi" inNegotiation

3

elationships can e descri ed in man! wa!s.< characteristic o most relationships is thateach part! has a causal in4uence on the otherpart!&s ehavior. ?ow people react to thatin4uence depends on what t!pe orelationship the! have.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

36/59


3/

our undamental elationship orms. < clearrepresentation o the t!pes o socialrelationships is presented ! is+e (1551 .is+e argues or our undamental orms:communal sharing, authorit! ran+ing, e ualit!matching, and mar+et pricing. ?e de'nesthem as ollows:

+ ti hi" i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

37/59


3

#.KCo!!una sha#ing is a relation o unit!,communit!, collective identit!, and +indness,t!picall! enacted among close +inD. Feople areound to one another ! eelings o strong

group mem ershipG common identit!G andeelings o unit!, solidarit!, and elonging.Bollective identit! ta+es precedence overindividual identit!.)." Autho#it3 #an'ing is a relationship o

as!mmetric diferences, commonl! exhi itedin a hierarchical ordering o status andprecedence, o ten accompanied ! theexercise o command and complementar!displa!s o de erence and respect"

+ ti hi" i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

38/59


35

3." E ua it3 !atching is a one%to%onecorrespondence relationship in which peopleare distinct ut e ual, as mani ested inalanced reciprocit! (or tit% or%tat revenge ,

e ual share distri utions or identicalcontri utions, in%+ind replacementcompensation, and turn%ta+ing"$. " Ma#'et "#icing is ased on an(intermodel metric o value ! which people

compare diferent commodities and calculateexchange and costl ene't ratiosD. The valuesthat govern this +ind o relationship aredetermined ! a mar+et s!stem.

+ ti hi" i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

39/59


$8

i!ensions of +e ationshi"s

E hi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

40/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$1

What A#e Ethics An) Wh3 5o The3A"" 3 To Negotiation?6thics are roadl! applied social standardsor what is right or wrong in a particularsituation, or a process or setting thosestandards. The! difer rom morals, which areindividual and personal elie s a out what isright and wrong. 6thics proceed romparticular philosophies,which purport to (a de'ne the nature o the

world in which we live, and ( prescri e

E hi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

41/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$)

Ma6o# Ethica Conce#ns

En)-#esu t Ethics7+u e Ethics7Socia Cont#act Ethics7 An)Pe#sona istic Ethics,

Ethi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

42/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$3


=an! o the ethicall! uestiona le incidents

in usiness that upset the pu lic involvepeople who argue that the ends 9usti ! themeans%that is, who deem it accepta le torea+ a rule or violate a procedure in theservice o some greater good or the#ndividual, the organi7ation, or even societ!at large.

En)-+esu t Ethics

Ethi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

43/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$$

Ma6o# Ethica Conce#nsCuppose a television networ+ has convincingstatistical evidence that a particular pic+uptruc+ was designed unsa el!, so that in 1 testout o 18, it ursts into 4ame when it in aside collision. To highlight this de ect, thenetwor+ producer decides to stage andvideotape an accident. Hut ecause acollision ma! create a 're onl! 1 time in 18,and the producer can&t aford to destro! 18

(or more truc+s, he decides to place

En)-+esu t Ethics

Ethi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

44/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$


Thus, the exploding truc+ viewers would see

would have een designed to "simulate"what (supposedl! happens to (supposedl!1 truc+ out o 18. #s this unethical, even i theproducer&s goal is to warn viewers a out the

ha7ards o this truc+ model>

En)-+esu t Ethics

Ethi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

45/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$

Ma6o# Ethica Conce#nsule 6thics emphasi7e that individuals oughtto commit themselves to a series o moralrules or standards, and ma+e decisionsased on those rules. ule utilitarians arguethat a decision ased on the utilitarian

standards reviewed a ove leads decisionma+ers into more trou le than ene'tGinstead, the! argue, the est wa! to achievethe greatest good is to closel! ollow a set o

rules and principles.

+u e Ethics

Ethi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

46/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$/

Ma6o# Ethica Conce#nsWho ma+es the rules> What are the rulesthat appl! in all circumstances> or example,those who elieve strictl! in thecommandment (rule "Thou shalt not +ill" willargue that the commandment is the same,

regardless o whether the su 9ect is murder,the death penalt! or a convicted murderer,militar! com at, a ortion (even to save theli e o the mother , or euthanasia (merc!

+illing o terminall! ill or sufering

+u e Ethics

Ethi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

47/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$

Ma6o# Ethica Conce#ns< third standard o ethics holds that therightness o an action is determined ! thecustoms and social norms o a communit!.ather than arguing that the utilit! o endsdetermines the standards, or that the utilit!o particular rules should appl! in allsituation, social contract ethicists argue thatsocieties, organi7ations, and culturesdetermine what is ethicall! appropriate and

accepta le or themselves, and then

Socia Cont#act Ethi

Ethi i

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

48/59

Ethics in

negotiations

$5

Ma6o# Ethica Conce#ns< ourth standard o ethics is that, ratherthan attempting to determine what is ethicalased on ends, or rules, or the social normso a communit!, people should simpl!consult their own conscience.

Pe#sona istic Ethics

Fersonalistic 6thics maintain that ever!oneought to decide or themselves what is rightased on their conscience. Whether one lies,cheats, or steals, there ore, is ultimatel! amatter o individual conscience and not the

nature o the ends, a solute rules, or narrow

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

49/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiations

8

e"a#ing fo# the Negotiation+u e /* 0e P#e"a#e) to P#e"

The most important act to consider is that thenegotiatorIs tas+ starts largel! e ore peoplesit around the ta le: the! have to e wellprepared, have a clear understanding o their

asic interests, o 9ectives, ottom line androom or manoeuvre. He ore participating in anegotiation, the! have to learn the asicsa out the ehavioural norms o their partnerIsculture, especiall! concerning appointments,

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

50/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiations

1

e"a#ing fo# the Negotiation+u e 1* Gathe# actua Info#!a

Le! in ormation must e collected prior to thenegotiation and the lac+ o such in ormationhas o ten een noted as a reason or theailure o negotiations. The negotiators should

thus create and demonstrate willingness toexchange in ormation with each other. Thiscan e done through:

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

51/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiations

)


J irst, 0oo+ or the match etween !our andthe other partiesI organisation. Cecondl!, whatt!pe o people are involved rom their sideGteam or individuals, technical or commercial

people. Thirdl!, Bhec+ which level o people isinvolvedG =ar+etingMpurchasing managers, NF s or B6*.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

52/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiations

3


J 6xpectations o the other part!: theirconstraints and limitations (especiall! in termso per ormance thresholds or mandate given! their superiors .J The other part!Is decision%ma+ing process:general st!le o decision ma+ing (centralised,decentralised, committee, etc. G who decides>?ow> #s decision strongl! related toimplementation> To what extent does it 't with

our own decision%ma+in st le.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

53/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiations

$

e"a#ing fo# the Negotiation2* Assess Inte#cu tu#a O8stac es as Ea# 3 as

!ou donIt need to +now ever!thing !ouroreign counterpart +nows a out his countr!and its culture. What !ou do need to +now ishow !our culture and the wa!s in which itdifers rom that o !our opponents afect whathappens at the ta le. Oour strength lies in !our+nowledge and understanding o !oursel and!our culture, as !our opponentIs strength liesin his +nowledge and understanding o his

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

54/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiationse"a#ing fo# the Negotiation, P#e"a#e fo# the T3"e of 5ea that (i 8e Ne

@iferent t!pes o pro9ects need diferent t!peso preparation. Fro9ects such as turn+e!,export sales, licensing, 9oint venture,dealership agreement, merger and ac uisition,etc., involve diferent depth or scope innegotiation. #n licensing agreements orexample, !ou have to decide whether ro!altieswill e paid on total production, sales or as alum sum.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

55/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiationse"a#ing fo# the Negotiatione 9* E!"ath3 is Not Enough

To e empathetic to other people thus meansto understand their needs and motives as wellas the! do themselves. To e success ul innegotiations, !ou must e a le to interpretand understand the other sideIs argumentsand reactions.

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

56/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiations

/

e"a#ing fo# the Negotiation

e :, 5e;ne 3ou# 0asic Inte#estSt#ateg3 o#!u ati

e

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

57/59

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

58/59

0est P#actices in

Negotiations

5

e"a#ing fo# the Negotiationace-to- ace Negotiati

/2* 0e e.i8 e (ith the Negotiation Agen)a

e /1* A o( @ou#se f P ent3 of Ti!e

8/9/2019 Unit 4 -NC

59/59

A the 0est

Unit 4 -NC

Documents

Transcript of Unit 4 -NC