fler Place at the Table: A Consideration of Gender Issues in Negotiation ‘peborub M. Kolb and Gloria G. Coolidge acca agenda of recent feminist studies acros the socialsciences hs been ASS ihe often cunhean voices of wormen. Ratner than teat wornert Spence avril ah invita ale oe Sheer of perwnaly, Onainiatuns, or rescore, ccent scholarship as Coote night the record and include women in Nstory an anihropotogy {is has meaot documecoting the experiences of women inte spheres of Shy which ae analy private (Cotte, 1976 Lene 1974, in Sociology She ofthe aienton has shied fom consideae women in maledomi Eteranieions or actives to femaledominated structures Rane, 1977 Reger, 1987 Keller, 1989). These stuctres, created by women for WORE, Tend tobe orgazed in wehs oe networks and rn along ferent conceptions ‘fmanagement (Kreger, 1987: Menkel Meadow 98S) Several works suck Sted wih ths teint approach are dose that document how tsdtnal developmental theory excludes womens experience. (lian, 1982 {odorow, 1978, Nile, 157). What emerges Urom ingiry ac these domains vx conception of an ateratve way of making sense of the wodd acting within "The stenatve voice! stars with the notion that women's social deve ‘opment occurs in the context of relationships (ligan, 1982, Chodorow BPR ake 196, an sa hia tet can snc of ic ough a screen or interconnection. Never having to repute deco [hs cacaking mother to define her own sexta Keay In adolescence the developing woman need no repre connection fr het ow Bw {Ghedorow, 1978). Instead of seputstion and mdtidintion a8 4 primary [Rote for action, women conceive of scion within the sment of sl Schtcanes1 oiers What tic inthe ste of mora esi Pe, tha lemmas can he ressved with felerence eather to abs Eres of sce or ied by ground conser of the was det {bot consdutone in teir deck making ther a macae prosido we sung taker se fon hems ae most Magee sndcreanding of some ofthe ways thit women tame a concen + zlational view of hers + am embedded view of agency + am understanding of contol through empowerment; and + prublemsolving through dsl While these dhemes suggest some ofthe ways women may define thei irnegotnted setting, we do not mean co macs that al women wend fy Constellation, and scl! sting certainly affect the meaning ached fender dferences and color dhe ways sich they are enacted {sey Existing research and our own experince soegest hat this ole the multiple voices of wore, while ral and distinc, often hushed ar negotation Wisc maybe occuring stat formal negotaton, cone sea context im whieh conzic and compeution are impos. may ot be Comiorable place for many women. In coping, with what she might. thee as an tna! place same women way ry to cma 2 carly inane syle (and do 0 quite snecessfly) whe others my fnd thea tomed stents and sls pated when placed st coaetud St ‘What we into doin the second pan of tht arc, therefore, the was in which women experichce conic and how ts may smpat ling these themes, we draw on both anecdodal data rom novice women tintors aswell as existing rscarch in negations and related fds Her Voice in Negotiation There #3 erin ony abou eying to ariulate 2 worn’ woe in So Ngaio on fr snare i lence an ead Interaction: Thats is beter to tal than ight and wo comer eves tices rather than pitting one pasty sans the ofr sna wins 2 (GtencetMeadow 16M Norteup, 1987s Roc. 1988, Sibey and 5! 1H), Further, 2voeates of retain and-ematve fms of Spa luton alten espouse a model uf negtition tha ss based on prob Principles presumably designed to eeate atcomes hat cette inte howd of al howe savoved, sun 4 presumed! Reminine principle Abe Uy, 1981, Menkel Meadow, 1983; Suh’ ad Crh 1987. Faber Frown 1988) this so, why shoal we care aout arueuling ‘once Presumably if thee iors ate corte thar oie sare ela 2nd dominates mach ofthe curren presenpve thinks about nego There ar atleast tice ease why the suc am ama {harsher a upniene aerences inte ways cand wom se OM ‘altho the research fen ycks contradictory conch and teow, 1975: Deas, TONK kag 18, Linn 1986) every {fur ecason why We need to focus on a woman’ voice negotiation: The Ih Mince to the negotitor whether male oe femate™ The advice to Focus on thy ett fret eom te jcc an eed fone ems Bevived to become more satoal in thelr thinking and anabsi Caters 1 tating an aerate oie Gor ces comes increasingly impor Eh ceri eid nwhish ns cee poco ae Par tics netiion hat af coi spi scat become equal proficsem a nd ahve the same raat, rapt si Noro tnd SS) Te pose Vee peep as tendency 1 drown out akernative ways of seing nel doing things, We io'consider the strictures snd contents ip more nuanced W=¥s Tom ag Spectve we hepin with gender and due dherses that might compre se 1 poe operates from an embedded view of, agency, any Negotiation must Relational View of Others Research pioneesed by Miler (1976), Chodorow (1978 and Gitigan fsgess that isles from boys in that they come to define theme Uhrough ther eationships When asked 'o deseebe tei resolution of ‘Sconmas, is rartatves conser show a scnexityto other? nee Sn incusom of ers. points of wiew in their judgments (Gilligan I eter C1986) describes worsen a3 ivingin a soma hetwcen OMe and tsreseifand tie ate not eas in opposison but ater in tems of “and support Ih interactions, his taneates for swomen into an tere Znd auemtion so the other a a rounding lor emotional connection, an tution of process of empathy snd shared experiences, nd an expectation mutual senstivay and responsi (surrey. 198). tis twoay onal model co understand as aporant as tobe understood: erapowe ws important a being empowered hore seem to be two aj ways that relational view of fi tity manifest in negotiation The fist i the conception 4 woman hase {on of responsible and commitments already made That, se is vir of how her ation tae context impact on oer pars of hee Me ‘nother people signant to her nstrunt fom gece persona “Stes te daytoday management of private ie an the spac those a sions have in nung a woman's eadiiy within working eos make Teal o consider an separate interest ia any single notation fom the Context ot wich t= 4 Part The cond imp ha seltonal ondring in eatin sa ‘which people cra some to know eich other share (or do ot share) al Gnd Jean ofeach others’ modes of interacting. Expeessions of movi iccling nd leaming how the other experiences the stuation ae 3s impo iFhor more imports, than the substance of the discourse (Hoch ‘owirup an Seapl, 1988). I ether words, Separating the people fom Problem isthe potlcm. Negitstion condted in 4 Woman voice Ie predict, start from diferent point and rn ferent course thane {puny penciled or putly postions model pesting from an embedded sense of agency, its possible that women iy be slow to recognize that negotiations se occur tress Uy aie Specialy demarcated irom the background agsint whch they secur Nhe ‘Street understood nt the ‘Te ean a we ran wih ur sens Cal women nates ne fom, the relationships the women had with each other spilled aver into the ‘me suc that cooperative outcomes nated the bei of al the rou Smt Yrengh Pmpesormnt Embed View of gen a pmectn ome ‘Koc cndereand eft contexnty ox i cs of tie impact sain tht het lp Her Dehra Sr Important ongoisrlstonshipe and 3s passing frames in volving Sa ee lnc of accepting the notion of power a8 dominion, mastery or tie "Thus exemple 4 settcontaincd concept of agency (Balan Simpson: 198)" An ‘imbeded form of agency eeaphaszes the 0 Serene hove of self and cs apa, oe), Ty WOM fen Tis mage incre acne ane at zm a perpen the eons bud emt ndThere is # continuing debate about the pice of power In negotggy some te, Faber 185) ane that it pore so mobilize power that conute to beter outcomes, Whie edhrs suggest such Yew gr {he economic und poluial content In which neyotstion aceurs (Ce Tes; Razcman, 1987), An empowerment vw which allows al pana peak ther interests and incorporates these nto aareements tht ae the indie and personalized notion of sequin, using, td Dene from the exerse of power i often camnssed as hopeless taive Hoss ‘isle that there are stuations (particular those that involve ongoing ‘ald relationships) in which mutual empowerment ta mich Setwee ais hich the paris ate seen to value dfercaly. The ct tae Problem Solving Through Dialogue Dialogue i cent o's woman’ mote of problem solving, Kis through co ‘huntiton and iteration wh ers that poems are teamed, const and resolved This kind of communication hes speci chariceneics Ga ferent i rom persuasion, argument. an debate. Acconing 10 (1985) women seck to engage the oer in ont explora of eas wh by undersinding ts progressively claied throsgh interaction, Thee fs fexpectaton that he tine wil pla apa of aeuve Ustence and contribute to the developing movement of hlets_ Women come to. Giingush betwee “realy talking’ wich requires cui ening and sare ttersctony 94 that emergent cas can yow 36 oth partcpants Sw deeply fom th fxperiences and anatte abies, a "drlactic al where people hold ‘with sharing wless (Belenky ct a, 1980) saies of women tment roles sues that women revel more about thes autudes, bes, Concer than men in sie potions nd ht ths contributes to product Slog in certain stustions (urd and Bele, 1979) "Women perceive problemsofving to he an interactive process. Just conflicts build up over Utes indwdeals or gooupe strate Tor fa wurces ur valued postions, women se conflict resolution a evolu poor toa interaction a wontans strength may bein fe abt 0 aap Jjow as she feats more sot seston from snwatement (Warren, 13 Rosaldo, 1974, Women's wellhned problem-solving skis, which Imerstve engagement and foster vet in te private sphere, ae OD sven fee expression in public dipure resolution (Clic, 1972. Problem solving through dbs n negation suests speci ‘of joining and opcanes in negotn, In place of a strates planning 0 Sr ewottaton, in which considerable ert & devoted to anal Secomdyessing the posible interests and postions ofthe omer, mob reflect aewhemerng understand, There ext rough his kind of {tuon the potential for tassormed understanding and outcomes Slance a eaming abou the problem together ad suit om the pre ‘ou have s yard forthe ethers eres and se sa high Yous Sich tamevork supa arr sire snare of oe itn sents dierent proces rm dat which ten describe the essence of omega negotiation Craher snd Ur. 1981, Kali, 19825 per tlace athe tbl Son Sau pe at St ae Seen ea nears es get ot: en Sey may Tak eaperence im desing openly wh (McKeon, 1588 “ons of them may uncemine thee behaior an pets Prese Serving Harmony scgccncdat, one of the Femile stents mised her hand and describedirc nilucace they may have exerted (Devanna, 198; Harmon cake 8 kr the same time, women are expected to do the emotional work in a eet expectations frequently constrain her ability to maneuver for herself or tr a es aig ig en To Doe ey actsions Qeitre te to develop two themes a this ale which in some respects Sols cotrcicton cach other Te essing fom existing ans SStraundesrbes what wont vice naga might sou ke fc wee mmgertne tat momen ier the oppor and sx Spe cvs an aerntne stctue and proces pic epitome tmern opty tat wenn wise pea ich ace arate ilo, ace ure and sch sting cea let he meaning sce topo stuadons ands clot ways wich the procs nd wom txts tin tare ence may be moe eure 1 peak aera Soe Himever an aero oie othe dees cat rele stint or, opens up posi ip certain hb of aeyotaons not ak Shun the Kinds of sees we employ, ut to alo or oer ‘ecg pote In nats whee to opeanesy and Tere {bats ae esa vole eyo be ea re infact There AG ty oer stations eed, the prose estated seen) {ete open to compromacorexpntslon, ire Hee me Hpk Sie secon pao tn ae ender see varie handed of pegotating experimen and ‘iar cna bs un a Bown, 1970, As Keene witness may ec me of he nen way ht EE loca newton. How an nea sets on tng The eof pce and ow te einer heaton whch she Herel Ctagh 1968), To the degre at negetaon signa cot Scere rere ata en oie oe tings cormpounded by er demeanor and soy of communion Sy ihoict and srhcunes inal her een at the began ae, Fe pace and profesional women we ma erm sbout he speci weet tis they se manages pea the uke somarty enacted Given tat dhe proces of neptiation a8 8c for pate die tear un communicate dirctly and authoritatively Pa ching eres: an problems defers, selfelacng, tha he aur be a spmineant detriment. also posse hat seni ao be an anetin peje. cag ad understing {Riles andr tos. The tlc or mame oat Beco Se ee tenet mor corns 9a expectations at the Table eerten an women come to de ble omen, hey bring wit Me rand eis of seeing the her ha shape how ach 2 RES and eprumacyaccovded to hv actions, When woe! ec mega they oon evoke cern steretype ost areata caer how they ae seen by thee negotaing pares Uekevpes ave Fania Women are expected £0 at pas, CO ec noncompeuine,acconsmoaing and ated the aan hose resent nnn, 1981). ae displays Bee (Slaics thou her behavior, then she reiorces some of these sere” tee eed aes may fn er fay spared However Gnd? non wih profes women) she may ct ws ae cu uctonpes Ths she agen an compete BP veer imeress ised he maybe gute stati in Fie gun se Py esearch ot rome tact fai and competi, Who EN, Jose but he emg and iy and veatenung om ‘Reece cr eer apes 197, Bey, 158 alg an a fu on lead lace sess some new was (0 purse {Ded Marha ob, When performance sn dectonraing and Ne cence nay reaton 4p pk of scar an enn se ‘yp nda cq yon an he matter of we’ We peste fat an aevmative vce one based ‘Gikachoytine Seuameneawemen by thon vive 0 the det ema up tn Sc eomeen = set na eo eee ott bed Pe Fan Meng, Ma Jandn, 4 (19709 Toe manager aman Carden Cy, sworn “ming ger No Syne NY. Mawel heal of ects Ade sora 0, gay to oo eater HS al af een Se Ye Ra ka 205) con on ent and ec mmo sta TT sees Sere rm eeece ‘nel fri Mogens) Romar oldnd En Carma "i 2-2 Shear sgn on ms al 9 ra nan a in ake can ie a Puna 58 sec Sm es: Hy men sa a a a wed sn wt ho i pc of gore Sot Marci Spiegelman, PJ Palos Gy Danap, MC, Gian, CJ, Maina tc, 1 ind Wateon, KW. (HONG) Cacnerilernces verbal communion during sce st cay NY a, ag Rv 5 1, Merah 196, atin Th rant of ig faa tele conan ast ma tis“ tanereConeranicaton hac Comin, Pet hares 1