Managing People

NEGOTIATION

Dr. Quassy Adjapawn [(MBA, MPS (Hons.), PHD)]

Email: StrategicPeace@gmail.com
quassy.peaceworks@gmail.com
Twitter: @adjapawn
Mobiles: 0244 633 151
0274 633 151
 Defining & understanding
Negotiation
 Negotiation is the basic means of getting what
you want from others. Involves the back-and-
forth communication designed to reach an
agreement when you and the other side have
some interest that are shared and others that are
opposed.
 Everyone negotiates something everyday.
People negotiate even when they don’t think of
themselves as doing so. All manner of situations
and issues can often form a part of negotiation;
families, formal and informal social groups,
between employer and employee, among
political groups, between lawyers and clients etc
 Defining & understanding
Negotiation
 More and more occasions require negotiation.
Everyone wants to participate in decisions that
affect them; fewer and fewer people will accept
decisions dictated by someone else. People
differ and they use negotiation to handle their
differences. Whether in business, government
or the family, people reach most decisions
through negotiation.
 Even when they go to court, they almost always
negotiate a settlement before trial.
 Negotiation is a fact of life (Roger Fisher and
William Ury, 1991)
What is negotiation?
 Negotiation is the process through which two
or more clashing parties agree to discuss
their differences in an agreed-upon setting to
find a solution that will meet their demands.

 Negotiation can be either direct or through

third-party facilitation. Formal negotiations
usually have a prior, exploratory, phase,
which enables the framework of the future
negotiations to be defined (2012 Yearbook of
Peace Processes).
What is negotiation? – Cont’d
 The process of making joint decisions when
the parties involved have different
preferences (McCuddy 2003).
 The process of combining conflicting positions
into a common position under a decision rule
of unanimity, a phenomenon in which the
outcome is determined by the process
(Markhof 1983)
 The process of interaction between parties
directed at reaching some form of agreement;
based upon common interests, with the
purpose of resolving conflict, despite widely
dividing differences (Spoelstra and Pienaar
What is negotiation? – Cont’d
 A form of interaction through which
parties…try to arrange…a new combination
of some of their common and conflicting
interests (Ilke, 1968)
 A process in which at least two partners
with different needs and viewpoints try to
reach agreement on matters of mutual
interest (Adler et al, 1987)
 Two or more interdependent parties who
perceive incompatible goals and engage in
social interaction to reach a mutually
satisfying outcome (Putnam and Roloff,
1992)
Who Negotiates?
 Babies negotiate – through crying

 Experienced adults negotiate with

acquired skills

 Learned ones negotiate with few more

tools

 Do animals negotiate????
Types of negotiation
The types of negotiation can be grouped
under (3) broad headings:

 Bilateral

 Multilateral and

 Multiple
Bilateral
 Bilateral negotiation involves two
persons or parties or sides.

 Examples may include a tomato seller

at the market and a customer, a
barber and client at the saloon and an
employer and an applicant for
employment etc.
Multilateral
 This type of negotiation involves at
least three or more parties.

 Example: between the governments of

three riverine states over the use and
management of a water body, or
between ECOWAS Countries or
European Union countries over
common currency, trans-border trade
or movement of their citizens across
their common borders
Multiple
 Involves one or more parties
negotiating several discrete
transactions with many other parties
in relation to one complex project.
 Example: Valco Agreements
between VRA and Government of
Ghana, GWSC, GPHA and Kaiser
Aluminium Co.
In reality ….
 Almost every negotiation involves
more than two persons. Several
different parties may sit at the table or
each side may have constituents,
higher ups, boards of directors or
committees with whom they deal
(Fisher and Ury, 1999)
Forms of Negotiations
 Negotiation may take one of two
forms namely:

– Direct negotiation; and

– Indirect negotiation.
Direct negotiation
 Direct negotiation involves the two
parties dealing or meeting “face-to-
face” to communicate verbally and
supplemented by submissions or
exchanges of documents and taking
decisions on issues of the negotiation
 Indirect negotiation
 Indirect negotiations involve the
principals using representatives to
negotiate. The principals therefore, do
not have a face-to-face encounter;
rather the negotiation takes place
through agents who may for example
do this either through meetings, over
telephone, e-mail, skype, telex,
facsimile, teleconferencing, exchange
of documents such as letters, notes,
draft agreements, MOUs etc.
When to employ which
 In many instances of negotiation both
of these forms may be used. It is
common for preliminary sessions of
the negations to take the indirect form
while the mid or latter part takes the
direct form.
Positional Bargaining vrs
Principled Bargaining

 What is the difference between

negotiation and bargaining

 Positional Bargaining

 Principled Bargaining
Positional Bargaining
 In positional bargaining, each party “...
takes a position, argues for it, and
makes concessions to reach a
compromise” (Fisher & Ury, 1991).

 The most common kind of Positional

Bargaining in negotiations is the
“allabraka” kind at the Makola
marketplace.
Positional Bargaining
 Positional bargaining tends to
produce unwise agreements because
the parties tend to lock themselves
into positions from which they have
difficultly in moving and develop an
interest in “saving face” or, where a
party adopts the soft version, gives
away too much to the other party,
such that it is not easy to arrive at
agreement by the parties
Positional Bargaining
 Positional bargaining is inefficient
because it invariably takes a great
deal of time as the approach
incentivises the parties to stall
settlement in the hope of getting a
better outcome than the other side.
Principled Negotiation
 Principled Negotiation however, is
deemed to meet the 3 critical criteria of
a good negotiation method, namely:

– it produces a wise agreement,

– it is efficient and
– it improves or at least does not
damage the relationship between the
parties.
The Seven (7) elements
 Seven elements of negotiation have
been identified, defined analysed
and systemised into a distinct theory,
practice and method of negotiation
under the Program on Negotiation
(PON) at Harvard Law School.
 The Principled Negotiation method
has been distinguished from the
positional bargaining method.
7 Element theory of Negotiation
Every negotiation has 7 obvious elements
that are interrelated:
 Communication

 Relationship

 Interests

 Commitment

 Legitimacy / Standards /Criteria

 Options

 Alternatives
[(Roger Fisher of Harvard's Program On Negotiation (PON)]
Negotiation spectrum
Negotiation spectrum – Cont’d
 Light passes through prism and split
into 7 different colours thus R=Red
O=orange Y=Yellow G=Green B=Blue
I=Indigo V=Violet (ROY G BIV). You
can also remember it this way: Read
Out Your Golden Book In Verses.
 Rainbow is made in a similar manner –
light enters water droplets, the
different wavelength colours bend at
slightly separate angles and break
into the rainbow colours.
Negotiation spectrum – Cont’d

 In this analogy, when NEGOTIATION

is passed through a prism, the 7
elements of negotiation should appear
at the exiting side of the prism – hence
negotiations.
 Or the 7 elements when passed
through a prism should appear at the
other of the prism called – hence
negotiations
Negotiation spectrum – Cont’d
CRICLOA
Interests
 Interests are the needs, concerns, goals,
hopes and fears that motivate the parties.
 Interests are the things dearest to you
that you wish to achieve in the
negotiation (David Laws).
 Negotiation based on Interests has
many positive attributes which enhances
a win-win opportunity compared to the
combative me versus you, thus win-lose
situation.
Interest – Cont’d
Can the following 3 examples be cited
as Interests?

 I want Dr Adjapawn to pass me

 I want my lecture Hall to be at the

GIMPA’s executive conference centre

 I want my fees paid back to me.

Re-phrase: Positions to Interests
 I feel that I am old and have spent
hours preparing for this exams and as
such, will feel bad and wasted if I fail
 I don’t feel prestigious anymore and
considering some factors, having our
classes there will be helpful and a
viable option
 I paid for a service that I feel I did not
get and I am frustrated
Alternatives
 Alternatives are steps each party
could take to satisfy their own interests
outside the current negotiation
 Identifying your interests allows you to
figure out your BATNA, WATNA and
MLATNA.
 You compare your alternative to the
possible agreement that is on the table.
Actually, under a given circumstances,
you need to find out what is best for
you
Alternatives - Cont’d
 Typically, one should not accept an
agreement that is worse than his/her
BATNA.
 So also should one endeavour to improve
on their WATNA
 As with interests, one should try to know
the other party's alternatives. A great way
to get the other party to move towards a
possible agreement is to get them to see
that their alternative to an agreement will
leave them worse off than the offer on the
table.
Relationship
 Negotiation involves relationships. It is
important when we need the consent of
others to achieve our ends, when we
can meet our ends better by involving
others, or when unilateral means are
not morally, socially, or politically
acceptable. Negotiation is interactive.
 An important question to consider
before beginning negotiation: How
important is the relationship I have with
the other party?
Relationship – Cont’d
 The kind of relationship will depict
how hard one presses certain issues,
tough stance, attacking or being
submissive
 Ideally, if the relationship will not exist
after the negotiation, you might not
care how the other feels or really be
concerned with their emotions.
 But, dealing with humankind,
remember that “Losing the battle
might help you to win the war”.
Evidence of Relationships
 Prior perceptions reinforced
(Grzelak,1982)
 Shared outlook, fewer divisive tactics
(Greenhalgh and Chapman, 1997)
 Strong bonds lead to more problem
solving (Rubin et al, 1994)
 Expectation of the future relations,
fewer contentious tactics (Sillar, 1981)
[Source: Spangle and Isenhart, 2003)]
Options

 Options deal with ideas about how

the parties might meet their interests
together.
 Tangible steps that serve interests
and can be part of an agreement
Options – Cont’d
 Options are the full spectrum of
possible agreements. When
suggesting options, keep in mind that
each option should meet the needs of
both parties - not just you!
 Parties should be allowed to work/list
their mutual options where possible.
Legitimacy / Standards
 Criteria that the parties use to
legitimise their perspectives.

 Sources of justification such as legal

standards or precedents, professional
norms, market value, social or
economic standards
Legitimacy / Standards – Cont’d

 Finding a neutral / fair deal: How do

you prove that offers or options from
both sides are fair?
 External standard defines the
legitimacy of the offers being made.
Communications
 Communications are the transfer of
messages by speech, writing or other
means
 A central process in negotiation is
communication. This can take place
implicitly in bargaining processes, or
more explicitly in different kinds of
conversation.
 Communication should not be taken
for granted.
Communications – Cont’d
 Communication ranges from what you
say, how you say it, body movements,
positioning, what you do not say,
when and how you do not move and
gestures
 Communication in negotiation is one
of your necessary tools. Double edged
tool: can be best or worst.
Commitment
 How do we guarantee we both will
follow through on our agreement?
 Commitments are promises made to
build or finalise agreement.
 Crucial to the negotiation process is
making sure that agreement reached is
realistic and that both sides can keep
their end of it.
Commitment – Cont’d
 If parties don’t commit, they will just
end up back at the mediation table or
even in court.
 Making sure both sides can commit to
the agreement ensures that the time
and effort everyone has dedicated to
the mediation is not wasted by
agreeing to something that is not
realistic.
7 Element Theory put together
 “Christ Centred Life Always Results In
Obedience”
 “Advocacy Campaign On Child Rights Is
Legitimate”
 “Relationship Is Communication And Lots
Of Commitments”
 “Concentrate on Love And Ignore
Confusions Regularly”
 Complaining Allow Often Infuriates Local
Community Rulers”
 The End

Negotiation in the classic diplomatic sense

assumes parties more anxious to agree than to
disagree” (Dean Acheson)