160 likes | 372 Views
Introduction. Negotiation is something that everyone does, almost daily. STUDING NEGOTIATION. Within organizations, at one time the study was limited to collective bargaining
E N D
1. CHAPTER 1 The Nature of Negotiation
2. Introduction Negotiation is something that everyone does,
almost daily
3. STUDING NEGOTIATION Within organizations, at one time the study was limited to collective bargaining & to purchasing.
By the late 1970s and early 1980s, there was an explosion of research.
4. Methods Williams: cooperative & competitive
Menkel-Meadow: problem-solving & adversarial
Lax & Sebenius: value-creating & value-claiming
Fisher: hard bargainer, soft bargainer, principled bargainer
Gifford: competitive, cooperative, integrative
5. The Sandtraps of Negotiation Leaving money on the table (“lose-lose” negotiation)
Settling for too little (the “winner’s curse”)
Walking away from the table
Settling for terms worse than your alternative (the “agreement bias”)
6. WHY ARE PEOPLE INEFFECTIVE NEGOTIATORS? Faulty feedback
Confirmation bias
Egocentrism
Satisficing
Self-reinforced Incompetence
7. Debunking Negotiation Myths Myth 1: Negotiations are fixed-sum
Myth 2: You need to be either tough or soft
Myth 3: Good negotiators are born
Myth 4: Experience is a great teacher
Myth 5: Good negotiators take risks
Myth 6: Good negotiators rely on intuition
8. Negotiations Negotiations occur for several reasons:
To agree on how to share or divide a limited resource
To create something new that neither party could attain on his or her own
To resolve a problem or dispute between the parties
9. NEGOTIATION METHODS Distributive
Zero-Sum
Positional
Competitive
Claiming value Integrated
Win/Win
“Interest Based”
Cooperative
Creating value
10. Interdependence In negotiation, parties need each other to achieve their preferred outcomes or objectives
This mutual dependency is called interdependence
Interdependent goals are an important aspect of negotiation
Win-lose: I win, you lose
Win-win: Opportunities for both parties to gain
11. Interdependence Interdependent parties are characterized by interlocking goals
Having interdependent goals does not mean that everyone wants or needs exactly the same thing
A mix of convergent and conflicting goals characterizes many interdependent relationships
12. Types of InterdependenceAffect Outcomes Interdependence and the structure of the situation shape processes and outcomes
Zero-sum or distributive – one winner
Non-zero-sum or integrative – mutual gains situation
13. Alternatives Shape Interdependence Evaluating interdependence depends heavily on the alternatives to working together
The desirability to work together is better for outcomes
Best available alternative: BATNA (acronym for Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement)
14. Value Claiming and Value Creation Opportunities to “win” or share resources
Claiming value: result of zero-sum or distributive situations where the object is to gain largest piece of resource
Creating value: result of non-zero-sum or integrative situation where object is to have both parties do well
15. Value Claiming and Value Creation Most actual negotiations are a combination of claiming and creating value processes
Negotiators must be able to recognize situations that require more of one approach than the other
Negotiators must be versatile in their comfort and use of both major strategic approaches
Negotiator perceptions of situations tend to be biased toward seeing problems as more distributive/ competitive than they really are
16. Value Claiming and Value Creation Value differences that exist between negotiators include:
Differences in interest
Differences in judgments about the future
Differences in risk tolerance
Differences in time preferences