Tema 3. Information management and human factor (2012)Apunte Español
|Universidad||Universidad Internacional de Cataluña (UIC)|
|Grado||Administración y Dirección de Empresas (ADE) English Programme - 2º curso|
|Asignatura||Negotiation theory and practice|
|Año del apunte||2012|
|Fecha de subida||06/06/2014|
Vista previa del texto
High Power distance Culture: identity Relationship Focused High Context Polychronic time mode External locus of control Americans Spaniards The objective of negotiation Timely closing of Developing the business the deal relationship Negotiation Style Direct Indirect Formal Informal Pragmatic Emotional What trust if Function of Detailed written Relationship and honor agreement Americans Spaniards What authority is Function of Delegation Seniority and Status The balance of power is function of Authority BATNA Bargaining over Positions 1 Geraldine Leirós Resumen Negotiation Theory and Practice • There are three criteria To produce a wise agreement if possible. It should o Meet legitimate interests o Resolves conflicting interests fairly o Durable o Take community interests into account Efficiency It should improve or at least not damage the relationship between the parties • Most common form of negotiation: taking and the giving up a sequence of positions. • Positional bargaining fails to meet the basic criteria of producing a wise agreement, efficiently and amicably. • Arguing over positions produces unwise agreements They tend to lock themselves into those positions. The more you clarify your position, the more committed you become to it. Your ego becomes identified with your position you have an interest in saving face. As more attention is paid to positions, less attention is devoted to meeting the underlying concerns of the parties. Any agreement reached may reflect a mechanical splitting of the difference between final positions rather that a solution carefully crafted. Result: frequently less satisfactory. • Arguing over positions is inefficient Process takes a lot of time. You try to improve the chance by: o Starting with an extreme position o By stubbornly holding to it o By deceiving the other party as to your true views o By making small concessions to keep the negotiation going. The more extreme the opening positions and the smaller the concessions more time and effort will take to make an agreement. The process requires a large number of individual decisions that is difficult and time-‐ consuming. • Arguing over positions endangers an ongoing relationship It becomes a contest of will Anger and resentment often result as one side sees itself bending to the rigid will of the other while its own legitimate concerns go unaddressed. More parties positional bargaining is even worse o More serious drawbacks o Reciprocal concessions are difficult • Leads to the formation of coalitions among parties • The position becomes much harder to change. 2.
Focus on interests, not positions 3.
Reconcile interests, not positions • Huge difference between positions and interests Interests define the problem o The conflict lies between each side’s needs. Works for two reasons o For every interest there are several possible positions. o When motivating interests are looked for, alternative positions can be found that meets both interests. We tend to assume that because positions are opposed, interests are as well Agreement is often made possible because interests differ. 2 Geraldine Leirós Resumen Negotiation Theory and Practice • HOW to identify interests? Positions are concrete, but interests underlying are hard to find. Ask WHY? Put yourself in their shoes o Make clear that you’re asking because you want to understand, not to get a justification. Ask WHY NOT? Think about their choice. To understand other party interests means to understand the interests he need to take into account: o Most powerful interests: HUMAN NEEDS • Security • Economics well – being • A sense of belonging • Recognition • Control over one’s life • To acknowledge other person interests o Basic human needs are easy to overlook o What is true for individuals remains equally true for groups and nations • Talking about interests: easier to serve your interests when you communicate them (explain them) To be specific: concrete details lead to: o More credibility o Add impact • Acknowledge their interests as part of the problem: people listen between if they feel that you have understood them. • Be hard on the problem, soft on the people: Advisable to be hard Commit yourself to your interests Often wisest solutions are producing by advocating to your interests. Pushing hard for interests stimulates creativity on each party. o Coming up with mutually advantageous solutions. Separate people from the problem. Be personally supportive. o Show that you’re attacking the problem, not them o Give positive support to the human beings on the other side equal in strength to the vigor which you emphasize the problem o Theory of cognitive dissonance: people dislike inconsistency and will act to eliminate it. • To overcome this dissonance, he will be tempted to dissociate himself from the problem in order to join you in doing something about it. o Combination of support and attacks works! o Negotiating hard doesn’t mean being closed to the other side’s point of view. Successful negotiation requires being both firm and open. 4.
Invent Options for Mutual Gain: • Skill at inventing options is one of the most assets a negotiator can have. All too often negotiators fail to reach agreement when they might have, or they end of with one that isn’t that good. WHY? • Diagnosis: obstacles that inhibit the inventing of an abundance of options. Premature judgment: inventing options does not come naturally. o Not inventing is the normal state of affairs. Searching for the single answer: change the scope of a proposed agreement. o Agreements may be partial, involve fewer parties, cover only selected subject matters, may expire. o Look to make the agreement more attractive. 3 Geraldine Leirós Resumen Negotiation Theory and Practice The assumption of a fixed pie: “the less for you, the more for me” Thinking “solving their problem is their problem”. In order to overcome these constraints, you need to understand them. o Almost always exists joint gain. o Identify shared interests: but they might not appear obvious. • Creative agreements reflect the principle of reaching agreement through differences. Kinds of differences: In interests In beliefs: agreement to submit the issue to an impartial arbitrator might be applied. Different values place on time: you may care about the present, the other one about the future. Different forecasts: taking advantage of these different expectations. In aversion to risk: risk can be traded for revenue. 5.
Insist on using creative criteria: almost always interests conflict. • Deciding on the basis of will is costly (bargaining over position) • Using objective criteria: to base negotiations on market value, replacement cost, depreciated book value, etc. To negotiate on some basis independent of the will. Be open to reason but close to threats. It produces wise agreements amicably and efficiently. An agreement consistent with precedent is less vulnerable to attack. Reduces number of commitments that each side must make. • Developing objective criteria: Prepare in advance Fair Standards: find more than one objective criterion An agreement might e based upon: o Market value o Precedent o Scientific Judgment o Professional Standards o Efficiency o Costs 6.
What if they are more powerful? • If any negotiation there exist realities that are hard to change. Protect you against making an agreement 4 ...