Introduction This paper critically evaluates the impact of power and trust on negotiation and decision-making.
Types[ edit ] Negotiation can take a wide variety of forms, from a multilateral conference of all United Nations members to establish a new international norm such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to a meeting of parties to a conflict to end violence or resolve the underlying issue such as constitutional negotiations in South Africa in or in Colombia with the FARC on to a business encounter to make a deal to a face-off between parents or between parent and child over the child's proper behavior.
Mediation is a form of negotiation with a third-party catalyst who helps the conflicting parties negotiate when they cannot do so by themselves Negotiation can be contrasted with arbitrationwhere the decision lies with the third party, which the conflicting parties are committed to accept.
Negotiation theorists generally distinguish between two types of negotiation  The difference in the usage of the two type depends on the mindset of the negotiator but also on the situation: Zero-sum games Distributive negotiation is also sometimes called positional or hard-bargaining negotiation and attempts to distribute a "fixed pie" of benefits.
Distributive negotiation operates under zero-sum conditions and implies that any gain one party makes is at the expense of the other and vice versa. For this reason, distributive negotiation is also sometimes called win-lose because of the assumption that one person's gain is another person's loss.
Distributive negotiation examples include haggling prices on an open market, including the negotiation of the price of a car or a home. In a distributive negotiation, each side often adopts an extreme or fixed position, knowing it will not be accepted—and then seeks to cede as little as possible before reaching a deal.
Distributive bargainers conceive of negotiation as a process of distributing a fixed amount of value. A distributive negotiation often involves people who have never had a previous interactive relationship, nor are they likely to do so again in the near future, although all negotiations usually have a distributive element.
In the distributive approach each negotiator fights for the largest possible piece of the pie, so parties tend to regard each other more as an adversary than a partner and to take a harder line.
Non-zero-sum game and Win-win game Integrative negotiation is also called interest-based, merit-based, or principled negotiation. It is a set of techniques that attempts to improve the quality and likelihood of negotiated agreement by taking advantage of the fact that different parties often value various outcomes differently.
While distributive negotiation assumes there is a fixed amount of value a "fixed pie" to be divided between the parties, integrative negotiation attempts to create value in the course of the negotiation "expand the pie" by either "compensating" loss of one item with gains from another "trade-offs" or logrollingor by constructing or reframing the issues of the conflict in such a way that both parties benefit "win-win" negotiation .
However, even integrative negotiation is likely to have some distributive elements, especially when the different parties both value different items to the same degree or when details are left to be allocated at the end of the negotiation. While concession is mandatory for negotiations, research shows that people who concede more quickly, are less likely to explore all integrative and mutually beneficial solutions.
Therefore, early conceding reduces the chance of an integrative negotiation. It can also involve creative problem-solving that aims to achieve mutual gains. It sees a good agreement as not one with maximum individual gain, but one that provides optimum gain for all parties.
Gains in this scenario are not at the expense of the Other, but with it. Each seeks to accord the Other enough benefit that it will hold to the agreement that gives the first party an agreeable outcome, and vice versa.
Productive negotiation focuses on the underlying interests of the parties rather than their starting positions, approaches negotiation as a shared problem-solving rather than a personalized battle, and insists upon adherence to objective, principled criteria as the basis for agreement.
Rather than conceding, each side can appreciate that the other has emotions and motivations of their own and use this to their advantage in discussing the issue. In fact, perspective-taking can help move parties toward a more integrative solution.
Put yourself in their shoes — People tend to search for information that confirms his or her own beliefs and often ignore information that contradicts prior beliefs.
In order to negotiate effectively, it is important to empathize with the other party's point of view. One should be open to other views and attempt to approach an issue from the perspective of the other. Discuss each other's perceptions — A more direct approach to understanding the other party is to explicitly discuss each other's perceptions.
Each individual should openly and honestly share his or her perceptions without assigning blame or judgement to the other. Find opportunities to act inconsistently with his or her views — It is possible that the other party has prior perceptions and expectations about the other side.
The other side can act in a way that directly contradicts those preconceptions, which can effectively send a message that the party is interested in an integrative negotiation. Face-saving — This approach refers to justifying a stance based on one's previously expressed principles and values in a negotiation.
This approach to an issue is less arbitrary, and thus, it is more understandable from the opposing party's perspective. Active listening — Listening is more than just hearing what the other side is saying.
Active listening involves paying close attention to what is being said verbally and nonverbally. It involves periodically seeking further clarification from the person. By asking the person exactly what they mean, they may realize you are not simply walking through a routine, but rather take them seriously.
Speak for a purpose — Too much information can be as harmful as too little. Before stating an important point, determine exactly what you wish you communicate to the other party. Determine the exact purpose that this shared information will serve. This approach in complex settings is best executed by mapping out all potentially relevant negotiations, conflicts and operating decisions in order to integrate helpful connections among them, while minimizing any potentially harmful connections see examples below.
Integrated negotiation is not to be confused with integrative negotiation, a different concept as outlined above related to a non-zero-sum approach to creating value in negotiations. Integrated negotiation was first identified and labeled by international negotiator and author Peter Johnston in his book Negotiating with Giants.
Rockefeller deciding where to build his first major oil refinery. Instead of taking the easier, cheaper route from the oil fields to refine his petroleum in Pittsburgh, Rockefeller chose to build his refinery in Cleveland.FAOPolicy Learning Programme Negotiation Theory and Practice: A Review of the Literature 1 “major public policies are the outcome of a complex round of negotiation.
Relationships in the 21st century are uniquely stressed by ideals of equality and reciprocity. The skills involved in negotiation with an equal partner, such as dealing with conflict respectfully, transcending power struggles, and authentically witnessing one another are key elements of Dialogue Therapy.
1. General: Bargaining (give and take) process between two or more parties (each with its own aims, needs, and viewpoints) seeking to discover a common ground and reach an agreement to settle a matter of mutual concern or resolve a .
Negotiation Analysis: The Science and Art of Collaborative Decision Making [Howard Raiffa, John Richardson, David Metcalfe] on srmvision.com *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers.
This masterly book substantially extends Howard Raiffa's earlier classic, The Art and Science of Negotiation.
It does so by incorporating three additional . Nov 06, · integrative negotiation. Negotiations in which there is a potential for the parties’ interests to be integrated in ways that create joint value or enlarge the pie.
Integrative negotiation is possible when the parties have some shared interests or opportunities to realize . Are you an effective negotiator? The Persuasion Tools Model can help you improve your negotiation, influencing and leadership skills.