I. What is Communicated During Negotiation?
A. Offers, counteroffers, and motives.
1. A negotiator’s preferences are communicate during a negotiation – they can have a powerful influence on the actions of the other party and on outcomes.
2. A communicative framework for negotiation is based on the assumptions that:
a. The communication of offers is a dynamic process;
b. The offer process is interactive;
c. Various internal and external factors drive the interaction and motivate a bargainer to change his or her offer.
B. Information about alternatives
1. The existence of a BATNA changed several things in a negotiation:
a. Compared to negotiators without attractive BATNAs, negotiators with attractive BATNAs set higher reservation prices for themselves than their counterparts did;
b. Negotiators whose counterparts had attractive BATNAs set lower reservation points for themselves; and
c. When both parties were aware of the attractive BATNA that one of the negotiators had, that negotiator received a more positive negotiation outcome.
C. Information about outcomes
1. Negotiators should be cautious about sharing their outcomes or even their positive reactions to outcomes with the other party, especially if they are going to negotiate with that party again in the future.
D. Social Accounts
1. The method used by negotiators to explain things to the other party, especially when negotiators need to justify bad news.
2. Sitkin and Bies (1993) suggests that three types of explanations are important:
a. Explanations of mitigating circumstances, where negotiators suggest that they had no choice in taking the positions they did;
b. Explanations of exonerating circumstances, where negotiators explain their positions from a broader perspective, suggesting that while their current position may appear negative, it derives from positive motives;
c. Reframing explanations, where outcomes can be explained by changing the context.
E. Communication about process
1. This can involve how well the process is going or what procedures might be adopted to improve the situation.
F. Is more information always better?
1. The influence of the exchange of accurate information does not automatically lead to better understanding of the other party’s preferences or to better negotiation outcomes.
2. The effect of exchanging information during negotiation depends on the type of issues being discussed and the negotiators’ motivation to use the information.
II. How People Communicate in Negotiation
A. Use of language
1. Language operates at two levels: the logical level (for proposals or offers) and the pragmatic level (semantics, syntax, and style).
a. The meaning conveyed by a proposition or statement is a combination of one logical, surface message and several pragmatic messages.
2. Gibbons, Bradac, and Busch suggest that threats can be made more credible and more compelling by negatively polarized descriptions of the other party and his or her position.
3. No matter the intent, how parties communicate in negotiation would seem to depend on the ability of the speaker to encode thoughts properly, as well as on the ability of the listener to understand and decode the intended message(s).
4. Negotiators’ use of idioms or colloquialisms is often problematic, especially in cross-cultural negotiations.
5. A negotiator’s choice of words may not only signal a position but also shape and predict it.
B. Use of nonverbal communication
1. Attending behavior let the other know that you are listening and prepare the other party to receive your message. There are three important attending behaviors:
a. Make eye contact
a) When speaking, one should not keep their eyes continually fixed on the other person – occasionally look away.
b) When persuading someone, it is important to make eye contact when delivering the most important part of the message.
c) Maintain eye contact when receiving communication as well as when speaking.
b. Adjust body position
a) To ensure that others know you are attentive to them, hold your body erect, lean slightly forward, and face the other person directly.
c. Nonverbally encourage or discourage what the other says.
2. Selection of a communication channel
a. People negotiate through a variety of communication media: over the telephone, in writing, and increasingly through such electronic channels as e-mail and teleconferencing systems.
b. There is evidence that negotiation through written channels is more likely to end in impasse than negotiation that occurs face-to-face or by phone.
c. There is also evidence that e-mail negotiators reach agreements that are more equal than face-to-face negotiators. Further, negotiators using e-mail need to work harder at building personal rapport with the other party if they are to overcome limitations of the channel that would otherwise inhibit optimal agreements or fuel impasse.
d. Thompson and Nadler (2002) identified four biases that can threaten e-mail negotiations. Face to face or over the phone interactions can help combat these biases:
a) Temporal synchrony bias
b) Burned bridge bias
c) Squeaky wheel bias
d) Sinister attribution bias
III. How to Improve Communication in Negotiation
A. The use of questions
1. The use of questions aids in clarifying communication and eliminating noise and distortion.
2. Asking good questions enables negotiators to secure a great deal of information about the other party’s position, supporting arguments, and needs.
3. Nierenberg (1976) proposed that questions could be divided into two basic categories:
a. Manageable
b. Unmanageable
B. Listening
1. Passive listening: involves receiving the message while providing no feedback to the sender about the accuracy or completeness of reception.
2. Acknowledging: When acknowledging the message, receivers occasionally nod their heads, maintain eye contact, or interject responses.
3. Active listening: When receivers are actively listening, they restate or paraphrase the sender’s message in their own language. Successful reflective responding is a critical part of active listening.
C. Role Reversal
1. In general, the research supports the following conclusions:
a. Role reversal is effective in producing cognitive changes and attitude changes.
b. When the parties’ positions are fundamentally compatible with each other, role reversal is likely to produce acceptable results (cognitive and attitudinal change); when the parties’ positions are fundamentally incompatible, role reversal may sharpen the perceptions of incompatibility and inhibit positive attitude change.
c. Although role reversal may induce greater understanding of the other party’s position and highlight possible areas of similarity, it is not necessarily effective overall as a means of inducing agreement between parties.
IV. Special Communication Considerations at the Close of Negotiations
A. Avoiding fatal mistakes
1. Keep track of what you expected would happen, systematically guarding against self-serving expectations, and making sure you review the lessons your feedback has provided the next time a similar decision comes along.
B. Achieving closure
1. Karrass suggestion negotiators:
a. Avoid making last minute remarks that may push a wavering counterpart away from the agreement.
b. Recognize the other party’s faux pas and do not respond to them.
c. Watch out for last minute problems such as nit-picking or second guessing.
d. Reduce the agreement to written form.
No comments:
Post a Comment