POWER FACTORS IN NEGOTIATION

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Nature and type of information. Presence of constituencies and the support they provide. Time and deadlines Legitimacy Alternatives to dealing with an opponent or arriving at the proposed agreement. Personal qualities of the negotiators style and personality.

NEGOTIATORS ARE MORE POWERFUL WHEN:

They have the information they need; they are well prepared. They have the full endorsement of their organization or constituency. They do not need to complete a deal under some deadline. They have the power of the organizations rules, policies, and procedures to back them. They have good options of completing the agreement. They have strong reputations for being persuasive, tenacious, and having personal integrity.

NEGOTIATORS ARE LESS POWERFUL WHEN:

When one or more of the aforementioned factors is operating against them. When one or more of the aforementioned factors resides in their opponents side.

INFORMATION PLANNING
1. 2. 3. 4. Define the issues. Define your objectives. Define the information needed for your objectives. Define the information needed to challenge the other negotiators arguments. After I make my arguments, what are they going to argue in return? How do I define my opening request and my limits? Learn as much as you can about your opponenthis goals, style, and reputation.

5.
6. 7.

NEGOTIATION PLANNING GUIDE

Before the negotiation: 1. What are the issues to the upcoming negotiation? 2. Based on the issues, what is my agenda? (Issues to cover and in what order) 3. What are my interests? (superordinate goals) 4. What are my limits? My Walkaway? My Alternative? How far can I go on my authority? 5. What are my goals? 6. Where should I start the negotiation?

NEGOTIATION PLANNING GUIDE

After I begin to know the other: 1. 2. 3. What are the other partys interests? What is their style and how will I deal with that style? What are some options for ways to resolve the issues?

PRESENCE OF CONSTITUENCIES AND THE SUPPORT THEY PROVIDE

Constituencies play two important roles: 1. They help us define our objectives. 2. They evaluate us after we come back from negotiation. Constituencies control their negotiators in two ways: 1. They give positive or negative evaluations or rewards. 2. They control a negotiators authority. (Limits of authority) Constituencies are frequently isolated from the negotiations and may appear to be unreasonable because they have no direct experience with the opponent.

TIME AND DEADLINES

1. 2. Deadlines create an appropriate rationale for making concessions. When both sides have a deadline or neither has a deadline, deadline power is equalized. While negotiators are at a disadvantage when they have a deadline and the opponent does not, creating a deadline for they opponent may offset this disadvantage.

LEGITIMACY

Legitimacy Factors from an organizational context:

The formal authority, the quasi-legal system of rules, policies, procedures, and practices that dictate how issues and problems will be resolved. If the policies and procedures back our preferred position and we are one of the rule makers, we have a great deal of power.

THE POWER OF HAVING AN ALTERNATIVE

1. 2. 3. 4. Good alternatives release us from the danger of overcommitment entrapment. Alternatives act as second bottom line or as limits. Alternatives serve as the viable options that permit us to walk away from unattractive deals. Good alternatives provide us with powerful tools for persuading our opponents that a deal must meet our needs.

Power Arising from a Negotiators Style and Personality

1. Persuasiveness Strong logical reasoning, good communication and selling skills, strong personal commitment to the objectives. 2. Tenacity Helps negotiators discover that there are may maybes, possibles, or it depends behind the opening no. 3. Integrity and character Excellent reputation for being trustworthy, honest, and principled.

How to Choose a Negotiation Strategy

Two critical questions: 1. 2. How important is the outcome on the substance of the negotiation (the issues) to the negotiator? How important is the issue of relationship between the negotiators?

Yes Openly Subordinate _________________ When the priority is on the relationship outcome Trustingly Collaborate ____________________ When both types of outcome are very important

Is the RELATIONSHIP outcome very important?

Actively Avoid Negotiation ___________

When neither type of outcome is very important

No No

Firmly Compete _________________ When the priority is on the substantive outcome

Is the SUBSTANTIVE outcome very important?

Yes

FOUR STRATEGIES FOR NEGOTIATION

High

Accommodation or Smoothing ____________________

Playing down the conflict and seeking harmony among parties

Collaboration or Problem Solving _________________

Searching for a solution that meets each others needs

Degree of Cooperativeness

Compromise
Bargaining for gains and losses to each party

Avoidance _________________
Denying the existence of conflict and hiding ones true feelings

Competition or Authoritative Command ____________________ __

Forcing a solution to impose ones will on the other party

Low

Low

Degree of Assertiveness

High

ALTERNATIVE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLES

1. TRUSTING COLLABORATION: When both the substantive outcome and the relationship are important.
When negotiator wishes to achieve good substance outcome and also ensure that the relationship will sustain open communication, trust, and willingness to sustain ongoing negotiations. Parties frequently treat negotiation situations as problems to be solved rather than confrontational disputes.
Unfortunately, to effectively achieve the outcome while maintaining the relationship, the parties must often make notable sacrifices on the substantive issues.

2. OPEN SUBORDINATION: When relationship is very important but substantive issue is less important
Where one resists aggressive negotiation on the substantive issues in order to keep the other side happy. (Other names: accommodation or even ingratiation.)

May appear to be condescending or demeaning But there are times when it is definitely appropriate to let the other side win and preserve the relationship and the opportunity to return later when the stakes are considerably more important and desirable.

2. OPEN SUBORDINATION: When relationship is very important but substantive issue is less important

When to use this strategy: 1. When one truly does not care about the substantive issue, 2. but something else from the other. 3. When one is willing to trade off the possible current outcome for a better advantage in a future negotiation 4. When one truly cares about the relationship.

3. FIRM COMPETITION: Strongly concerned about Substantive outcome but not the Relationship.
The negotiator pursues whatever it takes to obtain the desired outcome. Does not care developing any relationship or clearly expects the other party to be dishonest, mistrustful, and will use a competitive strategy. Often deteriorates to a conflictful atmosphere and is common among inexperienced and unsophisticated negotiators.

Usually leads to highly unproductive outcome for both sides.

4. ACTIVE AVOIDANCE: When neither substance nor relationship is important.

Negotiator sees that little can be gained on the substantive issues and that relationship is relatively unimportant to exert energy working it it. Active avoidance refusing to negotiateis the most aggressive form of avoidance. Other forms of avoidance are pleasant and socially acceptable, such as simply not showing up, not raising any strong objections, or focusing attention on other pursuits.