BUSINESS & LAW 1

Contents

1. Introduction......................................................................................................................3

2. Negotiation: An Overview...............................................................................................3
2.1 Negotiation Tactics........................................................................................................4
2.2 Negotiation Skills..........................................................................................................4

3. Negotiation Process.........................................................................................................5

4. Social Context of Negotiations........................................................................................6

4.1 Cultural Considerations.................................................................................................6
4.2 Overcoming Cultural Barriers.......................................................................................8
4.3 The Role of Gender.......................................................................................................8
4.4 Relationships in Negotiation..........................................................................................9
4.5 The Effectiveness of Emotions....................................................................................10

5. Conclusion.....................................................................................................................10

BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................................................................................12
BUSINESS & LAW 2

1. Introduction

The process through which people compromise or reach an agreement without an

argument or a dispute is referred to as negotiation. According to Brett and Thompson (2016),
negotiation is a method that is used to settle differences between individuals or groups of people.
There is a need to achieve the best outcome that can benefit an individual or the organization that
they represent in case of any disagreement. And this can only be possible through the use of
fairness principles that will benefit both parties mutually and maintain a good relationship.
Several forms of negotiations are used in different situations, but anyone can learn the general
skills of negotiations that are used in various activities to resolve differences that may arise.
Therefore the research paper gives an in-depth analysis that tests the knowledge of negotiation
and whether it is a process reserved only for the skilled diplomat, top salesperson or ardent
advocate for an organized lobby or it is something that everyone does, almost daily.

2. Negotiation: An Overview

Every individual has been involved in negotiations at some point in life. The negotiation
process knowledge and skills are not reserved for specific people, and this means anyone can use
the skills for survival purposes in the workplace and normal life situations. People need to grasp
some basic concepts of negotiation to enable them to be successful in negotiations (Brett &
Thompson, 2016). Scholars describe negotiations as a process of reaching an agreement,
bringing change and sometimes a process that can be used to acquire what one wants. However,
negotiation is a method used by two or more parties to come up with a neutral ground whereby
everyone will benefit through mutual consent. The research will define the negotiation process,
tactics, skills and actions lead to successful negotiations. It also goes deep into the cultural
influence and the barriers that may hinder the negotiation process from being a success.

In recent time there has been a lot of research in the different field on negotiations by
scholars. And the common definition is that negotiations take place when a party requires the
corporation of the other party for it to achieve's its goals. According to Coates (2000),
negotiations are used in decision making to resolve a conflict between two parties that may
hinder them from achieving their aim. The purpose of negations is clearly outlined as a way to
BUSINESS & LAW 3

resolve disputes and enhance the achievement of goals that a party cannot achieve on its own
(Lewicki et al. 2006).

Despite several different definitions, all the scholars agree that for negotiations to take
place successfully there must be two or more parties involved. There are several contrasting
views over negations, and different scholars have come up with theories try to explain and
answer questions raised over negotiations. According to Fox (2013), when negotiations are held
in one's inner self without the interference of external agents, it makes them valuable. The more
the scholars try to explain negotiation skills and tactics, the more they raise questions about
negotiations through critics, the first common definition loses meaning and perhaps the
definition in Oxford (2016) is not valid.

2.1 Negotiation Tactics

The negations tactics are broadly classified into two, and that's competitive and
cooperative or collaborative tactics. According to Cooke (2005), the collaborative tactic is an
integrative strategy aimed at bringing a joint gain to the parties involved in the negotiations
process. Whereas the competitive tactic is a distributive strategy whereby one party comes into
the negotiations to gain a large proportion of the resources involved at the expense of the other
party in the negotiations. Both Cooperation and competitive strategies are fundamental in a
negotiation's success. And it's for this reason that Lax and Sebenius (1986) argues that there is a
blurred line that separates the two strategies from each other. And thus they refer it as the
negotiator's dilemma, but at the same time, negotiators need both of the strategy hand in hand to
make the negotiation a success since there won't be any distributive gains if the parties cannot
establish a common ground.
The competitive negotiators believe that if an opponent gains it will be on their expense
and therefore to avoid a loss, they have to employ effective communication skills that will enable
them to evaluate the other party's interest faster. The competitive negotiators may resist trying to
make the other party submit to their demands. According to Fisher, Ury, and Patton (1991)
"when competitive negations last for a long time they may have consequences like less
commitment from either party, lack of enthusiasm and even broken relationships". The
opponents in competitive negotiations may feel intimidated if the other party displays a high
level of authority. And thus this is one of the tactics that is employed by negotiators to push the
BUSINESS & LAW 4

cooperative negotiators into submission and agreeing with the competitive negotiator’s demands.
“If the cooperative party decides to become competitive, it may lead to the negotiations lasting
for a long time, and this may lead to disputes and at times negotiation deadlock". The
competitive negotiators employ unethical tactics such as lying about offers and exaggeration of
the outcome facts to lure the other party into their trap of taking their offer by making them
believe that they will gain maximum from the negotiations.
Cooperative negotiations are designed in a way that both parties can cooperate and
collaborate to gain jointly. The negotiators combine their views to make the right decisions when
trying to solve the disputes between them. Social utility is maximized when the parties consider
their interests and try to gain from the mutual ground found between them. Cooperative
negotiations require both parties to be willing to compromise to enhance agreement and avoid
having prolonged consequences. Parties are most likely to adopt a cooperative strategy if they
lack a strong bargaining position in a negotiation. "Cooperative strategy is well suited to reduce
disputes and to reach agreements quickly and avoid loses on either side of the negotiations."
The two strategies have been accepted widely despite the critics from other scholars who
state that the strategies are just for experiment purposes and they were never designed to be used
in day to day negotiations activities which have been proved to be complicated. And thus due to
the complex nature of the humans, the two strategies cannot be relied on entirely as the only
tactics in negotiations, and this is because the negotiators cannot be predicted due to their
different characters in different scenarios.

2.2 Negotiation Skills

There is a need for negotiation skills in complex situations in life. There is a myth that
some people were born with negotiation skills, which is not true as people need to learn and
develop certain negotiation skills with time from a variety of disciplines. The most effective way
for individuals to learn these negotiations skills is true being involved practically apart from the
use of books. To defend the value posed by negotiation skills, one needs to acquire specialized
negotiation skills. Negotiations skills include a wide range of methods such as the ability to
persuade and influence, communication skills; the ability of the parties involved to communicate
effectively, ability to apply tactics: the parties should use the right tactics. The parties should also
BUSINESS & LAW 5

come up with the right plan to enhance the success of the negotiations, formulation of strategies
that favor both sides, teamwork and the use of right tools during negotiations.
Scholars in the past omitted an important aspect in negotiation which is trust. " even if the
negotiators had all the above skills during a negotiation process it will be difficult to reach an
agreement if there is lack of trust between the two parties (Smith et al., 2007). According to
Friedman et al., (2004) there is need to take into consideration the emotions, and the reputation
of the negotiating parties in play as this will help to determine the rational social aspects after the
negotiations have been concluded. It is also essential to highlight the importance that new skills
and techniques plays in a negotiation.

3. Negotiation Process

The process of negotiation involves the parties coming up with an agreement that will
help to prevent them from arguments that may bring the dispute between the individuals or the
groups involved in the process (Weiss, 1997). In most instances, if not all, the aim of people
having to negotiate is for them to be able to achieve a solution that is best for the individuals and
should be a fair decision that keeps the mutual relationship among the individuals intact. In a
negotiation, both parties should feel the decision being reached upon merits both parties for it to
be accepted. Negotiation needs to be between two parties who can be people or a group and is
caused due to both of them having a conflict of interest. Negotiation comes into place so that the
individual's grievances are taken into consideration and the final decision is not entirely based on
what one wants but the best way forward of solving the conflict of interest without biases.
According to O'Faircheallaigh, (2018). The agreement to be reached upon can take longer and
may have difficulties due to the divided opinions, but the process of attaining common ground
through continuous negotiation process should be completed. The process of negotiation requires
that the parties be flexible to avoid the negative impact of the outcome of the process through
understanding each other by communicating well with each other to create a common
understanding that will be credible to each of the parties involved.
Negotiations have stages that it goes through to be effective; these include preparation for
the negotiation to take place. Through identification and planning on the need for the negotiation,
they are establishing all the ways possible of solving the conflict and determining the long term
BUSINESS & LAW 6

solution and consequences if there may be any. This stage basically consists of three phases: 1)
self assesment. 2) assesment of the counterpart’s strength and weaknesses and 3) situation
asessment. A skilled negotiator in this phases involves in designing and structuring the BATNA (
Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) and WATNA (Worst Alternative To a Negotiated
Agreement), which are the crucial parameters that determine the outcome of a negotiation.
BATNA accentuates the point till where the negotiator is willing to accept the terms and
conditions of the counterpart’s proposal, whereas the WATNA helps in minimizing the risk and
loss involved in the worst case scenario and make the best out of a worst situation. Furthermore,
the counterpart’s and situation assesment helps a negotiator to structure his/her tactics and
accordingly help him/her to gain a larger share of the pie in a negotiaon.The other crucial stage
involves the discussion on how to solve the issues through and to formulate the best available
options on negotiating and both parties to have a position. The next stage is the parties or
individuals giving out their proposals according to the needs they have. The agreements can be
done in writing to be more credible and also to make the parties avoid conflicting — the
negotiation due to the concession that has to be reached among the parties. Finally, an agreement
has to be made after the negotiation process is over between the two parties, and after that, each
party should stick to the proposed rules. The agreement should be able to address all the
concerns that are raised by the parties, and the negotiation should set fair policies to all the
parties to feel equal.

The Social Context of Negotiations

4.1Cultural Considerations

According to Gelfand et al., (2004) Different cultures have different forms and understanding on
how people should do negotiation, which may be different from how they negotiate the use of
their diverse languages. In many cultures, the reason for them to have negotiation is to discuss
how to have a share of the resources. Many have come to understand those negotiations are used
broadly to solve issues of the relationship between people and to make decisions on how to
operate without creating a negative effect on their counterparts. Different people in every culture
have their way on how they take upon negotiation by having a particular perception and
BUSINESS & LAW 7

interpretation process. After a negation has been made, people will think of the outcome
differently according to the culture especially when the issue being negotiated is on social
interaction which has a direct impact on the thinking and the behavior of the people's way of life.
The culture forms the basis on where the negotiator will base his or her arguments to find
common ground which will keep the relationship among the parties intact and reconstructing all
broken ones in the equal allocation of resources. Culture has been the most important pillar of
helping negotiators knowing how to negotiate to avoid a lack of agreement and failure after it is
done; hence, it been a foundation of successful negotiations.

4.2 Overcoming Cultural Barriers

There are several obstacles faced when holding negotiations with parties from a different
cultural setup that have different ideologies and various laws that govern them (Hofstede &
Usenier, 2002). These differences may not be anticipated during negotiation, and therefore, they
come in as barriers and thus, there is a need to understand the counterpart's culture by
interpreting their attitudes, norms and value. Perhaps the very first barrier that needs to be
overcome is communication problems, and this is because people from different cultures
communicate differently, and they may be misunderstood. A good example is the businessmen
from Japan who says "that's difficult" meaning that's completely impossible, but people from
other cultures may feel there is still hope to get the deal done without knowing the Japanese don't
like any further confrontations after that.
Some of the remarkable ways of overcoming the cultural barriers in negotiations include
carrying out enough research on the counterpart’s culture through contacting those who are
familiar with the other party’s culture and one may also contact the other party to gather
information about their culture instead of overlooking such a significant aspect (McSweeney,
2002). It will be a big mistake to belittle any unfamiliar cultural practices from the other party.
and therefore as a negotiator, one should make sure they show respect for the cultural differences
and try as much as possible to formulate a conversation that will be able to solve any challenges
that the cultural differences may pose in the process of negotiations. The research on the cultural
differences will show the importance that is placed on the negotiations. According to Meardi and
Marginson, (2006) the perception that your counterparts have about your culture is also essential
as all the parties in the negotiation more often are influenced by their cultures. If by any chance
BUSINESS & LAW 8

the other party has a predictable cultural standpoint view about you it is wise to make changes
the way you approach the negotiations and this will knock them off their perception and create a
chance for a better outcome from the process. No party in the negotiations should allow the
cultural differences to divide them and prevent the negations from having a positive outcome.
Thus there is a need to find a way to bridge the cultural gap between the parties in negation and
find common ground where everyone will feel their goals have been taken into consideration.

4.3 The Role of Gender

There has been a noticeable growth in the role that gender plays in negotiations in recent
time. According to Kray and Thompson (2005), the researchers are constantly accumulating
evidence to show how gender affects negotiations. It has been predicted that in the future gender
will be one of the major aspects in negotiations thus creating a strong effect on the results and
therefore negotiators must consider and understand the effects of gender before entering a
negotiation. It’s wrong to focus only on the economic gains rather than the entire effects that
gender has on negotiations. Negotiations are more successful and fruitful when the gender effects
are considered. The women have been depicted to be inferior during negotiations according to
Curhan et al., (2010) and therefore during the negotiation process, the women seem to be more
cooperative as compared to men who are competitive as they have a perception that they are
superior and entitled. Gain in terms of money is the most assessed outcome of negotiations;
however, the researchers are moving away from that and focusing more on the impacts of gender
on negotiations (McSweeney, 2002). It’s crucial to understand the relationship of gender to the
outcome of negotiations, and this could help to create satisfaction during the process of
negotiation.
4.4 Relationships in Negotiation
building a good relationship with your conterparts is one of the key asppects during a
negotiation process. According to Rees and Edwards (2011), One should be able to listen
carefully and willing to take into consideration the offers from the counterpart. Learning about
the counterpart’s interests and being able to challenge them with better alternative offers when
they make their first offer always helps in the creation of a connection both personally and
psychologically (Lawler, & Ford, 1995). Hence this can boost the outcome of the negotiation.
The best negotiators value reationship as they are aware it will create a long trm effect on the
BUSINESS & LAW 9

outcomes. The scholars state that the counterparts are likely to counter which actions one takes
with close or similar actions, and that's why it's important to value each other during the process
and to treat each other with respect.
4.5 The Effectiveness of Emotions
According to Wilson (2016) If one party has exactly what the other party has been
looking for and are contented with the asking price, then a cold transaction takes between the
two. However human beings are full of emotions, and during the process of negotiations, there
are a lot of emotions involved when making decisions but amazingly its how the relations and
satisfaction feelings are rare in the process of negotiations. Different emotions lead to specific
perception or behaviors during the negotiation process (Pfetsch & Landau, 2000). Individuals
judge and make decisions according to their emotions and thus if someone was presented a
chance to make a decision about a specific when he/she happy and on the other hand when
he/she is feeling sad the individual is likely to make two different choices depending on the
emotions. Therefore it's advisable for the negotiators to be able to learn how to control their
emotions during the negotiation process (Brooks, 2015). Long-term relationships may be
affected if negotiators are unable to control some emotions such as aggression and anger perhaps
that’s why Diamond (2011) states “if emotions are not well controlled they may prove to be
one’s enemy during the negotiation process”.
5. Conclusion
The research report depicts that negotiation is not a process reserved only for the skilled
diplomat, top salesperson, or ardent advocate for an organized lobby; it is something that
everyone does, almost daily. Negotiations are relevant to the daily life of individuals in homes at
work. The individual negations at homes are less complicated as family members know each
other well, and they can easily predict the outcome. It's wrong to assume that negotiation skills
are something an individual is born with. Therefore if someone wants to be the best negotiator,
there is a need to learn and acquire the skills through practical involvement. The negotiations in
an organization or between different groups prove to be complex as they need both parties to be
prepared and also the formulation of a well-outlined plan. Cooperative and competitive strategies
are crucial for a negotiation process to be successful. But above all, the parties must be willing to
establish a common goal, and they should also be willing to be committed to the agreement from
the negotiations. Gender and cultural factors should not be ignored as they can largely affect and
BUSINESS & LAW 10

add a twist to the expected outcome or even lead to prolonged disputes between the negotiating
parties.
BUSINESS & LAW 11

Bibliography
Brett, J., & Thompson, L. (2016). Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 136, 68-79.
Cooke, W.N., 2005. Exercising power in a prisoner's dilemma: transnational collective
bargaining in an era of corporate globalization? Industrial Relations Journal,
36(4),pp.283–302.
Friedman, O., & Leslie, A. M. (2004). A developmental shift in processes underlying successful
belief‐desire reasoning. Cognitive Science, 28(6), 963-977.
Gelfand, M. J., & Cai, D. A. (2004). Cultural Structuring of the Social Context of Negotiation. In
M. J. Gelfand & J. M. Brett (Eds.), The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp. 238-
257). : Stanford University Press.
Hofstede, G. &Usenier, J.C., 2002. Cultural Aspects of International Business Negotiations. In
International Business Negotiations. pp. 97–136.
Lawler, E. & Ford, R., 1995. Bargaining and Influence in Conflict Situations, Available at:
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1783&context=articles
[Accessed May 17, 2017].
Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1986). Interests: The measure of negotiation. Negotiation
Journal, 2(1), 73-92.
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D. and Barry, B. (2011) Essentials of Negotiation. London, McGraw Hill.
Chapter One.
McSweeney, B., 2002. Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their consequences:
A triumph of faith-a failure of analysis. Human relations, 55(1), pp.89–118. Available at:
http://hum.sagepub.com/content/55/1/89.short [Accessed May 16, 2017].
Meardi, G. &Marginson, P., 2006. The Complexities of Relocation and the Diversity of Union
Responses: Efficiency Oriented FDI in Central Europe. , pp.1–18.
O'Faircheallaigh, C. (2018). Negotiations between mining companies and Aboriginal
communities: Process and structure.
Pfetsch, F. & Landau, A., 2000. Symmetry and Asymmetry in International Negotiations.
International Negotiation, 5, pp.21–42. Available at:
https://eduedi.dongguk.edu/files/20070519075111526.pdf [Accessed May 17, 2017].
BUSINESS & LAW 12

Smith, J., & Ross, H. (2007). Training parents to mediate sibling disputes affects children's
negotiation and conflict understanding. Child Development, 78(3), 790-805.
Weiss, S.E., 1997. Explaining Outcomes of Negotiation: Toward a Grounded Model for
Negotiations Between Organizations. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 6,
pp.247–333.
Wilson, K. S., DeRue, D. S., Matta, F. K., Howe, M., & Conlon, D. E. (2016). Personality
similarity in negotiations: Testing the dyadic effects of similarity in interpersonal traits
and the use of emotional displays on negotiation outcomes. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 101(10), 1405.