NEGOTIATION // softskills

1.                  What is negotiation?

The definition of negotiation can be defined as : the action or process of negotiating or being negotiated —often used in plural negotiations between the two governments have failed to produce an agreement.

2.            What are the negotiation style? Explain!

The top 5 Negotiating Styles of Thomas and Kilmann.

1. Competing (I win – You lose)
This style of negotiation is best described as competitive and is one of the most used styles in negotiating. Negotiators using this style are looking out for their own needs, asking themselves ‘what do I need to get from this discussion / process?’. They use a variety of tactics to get what they want and their concern for the relationship is low.

This style is most effective when results are needed quickly, or you are certain there is no room for negotiation. Good examples of this style are buying a new car or a lawyer representing their client or commodity based selling.

2. Accommodating (I Lose – You Win)
This style of negotiation is all about the relationship and is the polar opposite of the Competing style. Accommodating negotiators believe that the only way to ultimately get what they want is to give everything to the other party and maybe in time they will do the same or stay. This style, is naturally, well liked by the opposite party.

Examples of this style are when a person knowingly injures another person and willingly offers to pay all medical expenses hoping the injured party does not sue.

3.Compromising (I Lose / Win Some – You Lose/ Win Some)
The old adage ‘pick your battles’ applies here. This style values the relationship and acknowledges that there is a loss but it is better to compromise then completely lose. A compromising style results in both parties getting more or less half of what they originally wanted. This style is common when the negotiating parties have a high level of trust between each other and are time poor. This style should not be confused with Collaborating (I win – You win).

4. Collaborating (I Win – You Win)
Collaborative negotiators are innovators! They recognise that both parties have needs that must be met and take the time to find creative solutions to this common conundrum. In business, this style of negotiating is often seen as the “Holy Grail”.

Most business to business negotiators plan for this type of negotiation. Some organisations are well known for their collaborative style of negotiating where some others are known for being mercenaries in their approach.

It needs to be recognised that this style of negotiating is somewhat wonderful ideological because in reality it is high on resources and time.

An example of this style is Honda Motor Company which is known for being completely focused on a collaborative approach to working with their suppliers resulting in greater commitment and cooperation and well built cars!

5. Avoiding (I Lose – You Lose)
This style can be more difficult to spot as it can go under cover for a time; it is a ‘passive aggressive style’. The user of this style is unassertive and uncooperative. They do not immediately pursue their own concerns or the other parties nor do they ever address the conflict. This style is usually a vengeful style and whilst the adopters of this style won’t address the conflict they will seek ways of retribution. This style is usually in response to a highly competitive style. The avoider will shut down communication and contact and will seemingly disappear off the radar. While this is in play, mutual resentment builds and cracks to total breakdown of the relationship may occur.

An example of this style is two co-workers who cannot agree on the delivery of a project and avoid communicating with each other but happily talk to other co-workers about it!

Managing negotiations takes skill and training. For more information on styles click on the topic ‘Negotiation Skills’ which includes templates, models, do’s and don’t’s and more.

3.            Explain the negotiation process!

Negotiation process permeates the interactions of almost everyone in groups and organizations.

The five steps of the negotiation process are;

1.      Preparation and Planning

Before the start of negations, one must be aware of the conflict, the history leading to the negotiation the people involved and their perception of the conflict expectations from the negotiations etc.

2.      Definition of Ground Rules

Once the planning and strategy are developed, one has to begin defining the ground rules and procedures with the other party over the negotiation itself that will do the negotiation. Where will it take place?

What time constraints, if any will apply? To what issues will negotiations be limited? Will there be a specific procedure to follow in an impasse is reached? During this phase, the parties will also exchange their initial proposals or demands.

3.      Clarification and Justification

When initial positions have been exchanged both the parties will explain amplify, clarify, bolster and justify their original demands. This need not be confrontational.

Rather it is an opportunity for educating and informing each other on the issues why they are important and how each arrived at their initial demands.

This is the point where one party might want to provide the other party with any documentation that helps support its position.

4.      Bargaining and Problem Solving

The essence of the negotiation process is the actual give and take in trying to hash out an agreement, a proper bargain. It is here where concessions will undoubtedly need to be made by both parties.

5.      Closure and Implementation

The final step in the negotiation process is formalization the agreement that has been worked out and developing and procedures that are necessary for implementation and monitoring.

For major negotiations – this will require hammering out the specifics in a formal contract.

Negotiation Process has five stages. In all steps of a negotiation process, the involved parties bargain at a systematic way to decide how to allocate scarce resources and maintain each other’s interest.

4.            What are the characteristic of negotiation?

There are certain characteristics of the negotiation process. These are:

a)      There are a minimum of two parties present in any negotiation.

b)      Both the parties have pre-determined goals which they wish to achieve.

c)      There is a clash of pre-determined goals, that is, some of the pre-determined goals are not shared by both the parties.

d)     There is an expectation of outcome by both the parties in any negotiation.

e)       Both the parties believe the outcome of the negotiation to be satisfactory.

f)       Both parties are willing to compromise, that is, modify their position.

g)      The incompatibility of goals may make the modification of positions difficult.

h)      The parties understand the purpose of negotiation

5.                  Explain the positive and negative affect in negotiation!

The positive affects in negotiation :Even before the negotiation process starts, people in a positive mood have more confidence and higher tendencies to plan to use a cooperative strategy. During the negotiation, negotiators who are in a positive mood tend to enjoy the interaction more, show less contentious behavior, use less aggressive tactics and more cooperative strategies. This in turn increases the likelihood that parties will reach their instrumental goals and enhance the ability to find integrative gains. Indeed, compared with negotiators with negative or natural affectivity, negotiators with positive affectivity reached more agreements and tended to honor those agreements more. Those favorable outcomes are due to better decision making processes, such as flexible thinking, creative problem solving, respect for others' perspectives, willingness to take risks and higher confidence. Post negotiation positive affect has beneficial consequences as well. It increases satisfaction with achieved outcome and influences one's desire for future interactions. The PA aroused by reaching an agreement facilitates the dyadic relationship, which result in affective commitment that sets the stage for subsequent interactions.

PA also has its drawbacks: it distorts perception of self performance, such that performance is judged to be relatively better than it actually is. Thus, studies involving self reports on achieved outcomes might be biased.

Negative Affect in Negotiation

Negative affect has detrimental effects on various stages in the negotiation process. Although various negative emotions affect negotiation outcomes, by far the most researched is anger. Angry negotiators plan to use more competitive strategies and to cooperate less, even before the negotiation starts. These competitive strategies are related to reduced joint outcomes. During negotiations, anger disrupts the process by reducing the level of trust, clouding parties' judgment, narrowing parties' focus of attention and changing their central goal from reaching agreement to retaliating against the other side. Angry negotiators pay less attention to opponent's interests and are less accurate in judging their interests, thus achieve lower joint gains. Moreover, because anger makes negotiators more self-centered in their preferences, it increases the likelihood that they will reject profitable offers. Anger does not help in achieving negotiation goals either: it reduces joint gains and does not help to boost personal gains, as angry negotiators do not succeed in claiming more for themselves. Moreover, negative emotions lead to acceptance of settlements that are not in the positive utility function but rather have a negative utility. However, expression of negative emotions during negotiation can sometimes be beneficial: legitimately expressed anger can be an effective way to show one's commitment, sincerity and needs. Moreover, although NA reduces gains in integrative tasks, it is a better strategy than PA in distributive tasks (such as zero-sum). In his work on negative affect arousal and white noise, Seidner found support for the existence of a negative affect arousal mechanism through observations regarding the devaluation of speakers from other ethnic origins." Negotiation may be negatively affected, in turn, by submerged hostility toward an ethnic or gender group.