You are on page 1of 27

10-1

McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved


CHAPTER TEN
Relationships in
Negotiation
10-2
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Negotiating through Others
within a Relationship
The Adequacy of Established Theory and
Research for Understanding Negotiation
within Relationships
Forms of Relationships
Key Elements in Managing Negotiations
within Relationships
10-3
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Adequacy of Theory and Research for
Understanding Negotiation within Relationships
Current negotiation theory is based on trans-actional
research. Only recently have researchers begun to
examine negotiations in a relationship context:
Negotiating within relationships takes place over time
Negotiation is often not a way to discuss an issue, but a way to
learn more about the other party and increase interdependence
Resolution of simple distributive issues has implications for
the future


10-4
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Adequacy of Theory and Research for
Understanding Negotiation within Relationships
Distributive issues within relationships can be
emotionally hot
Negotiating within relationships may never end
Parties may defer negotiations over tough issues in order to
start on the right foot
Attempting to anticipate the future and negotiate everything
up front is often impossible
Issues on which parties truly disagree may never go away
10-5
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Adequacy of Theory and Research for
Understanding Negotiation within Relationships
In many negotiations, the other person is the
focal problem.
In some negotiations, relationship preservation
is the overarching negotiation goal, and parties
may make concessions on substantive issues to
preserve or enhance the relationship
10-6
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Forms of Relationships
Four fundamental relationship forms:
1. Communal sharing
2. Authority ranking
3. Equality matching
4. Market pricing

10-7
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Forms of Relationships
1. Communal sharing
A relation of unity, community, collective
identity, and kindness, typically enacted
among close kin
Such relationships are found in:
Families
Clubs
Fraternal organizations
Neighborhoods
10-8
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Forms of Relationships
2. Authority ranking
A relationship of asymmetric differences,
commonly exhibited in a hierarchical
ordering of status and precedence
Examples include:
Subordinates to bosses
Soldiers to their commander
Negotiators to their constituents
10-9
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Forms of Relationships
3. Equality matching
A one-to-one correspondence relationship in
which people are distinct but equal, as
manifested in balanced reciprocity (or tit-for-
tat revenge)
Examples include:
College roommates

10-10
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Forms of Relationships
4. Market pricing
Based on metrics of valuation by which
people compare different commodities and
calculate exchange and cost/benefit ratios
Examples can be drawn from all kinds of
buyerseller transactions
10-11
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Four Key Dimensions of Relationships
10-12
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Negotiations in
Communal Relationships
Parties in a communal sharing relationship:
Are more cooperative and empathetic
Craft better quality agreements
Perform better on both decision making and motor
tasks
Focus their attention on the other partys outcomes as
well as their own
Focus attention on the norms that develop about the
way that they work together


10-13
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Negotiations in
Communal Relationships
Parties in a communal sharing relationship
(cont.):
Are more likely to share information with the other
and less likely to use coercive tactics
Are more likely to use indirect communication about
conflict issues, and develop a unique conflict
structure
May be more likely to use compromise or problem
solving strategies for resolving conflicts
10-14
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Key Elements in Managing
Negotiations within Relationships
Reputation
Trust
Justice
10-15
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Key Elements in Managing
Negotiations within Relationships
Reputation
Perceptual and highly subjective in nature
An individual can have a number of different, even
conflicting, reputations
Influenced by an individuals personal
characteristics and accomplishments.
Develops over time; once developed, is hard to
change.
Negative reputations are difficult to repair

10-16
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Key Elements in Managing
Negotiations within Relationships
Trust
An individuals belief in and willingness to act
on the words, actions and decisions of another
Three things that contribute to trust
1. Individuals chronic disposition toward trust
2. Situation factors
3. History of the relationship between the parties

10-17
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Key Elements in Managing
Negotiations within Relationships
Two different types of trust:
Calculus-based trust
Individual will do what they say because they are rewarded
for keeping their word or they fear the consequences of not
doing what they say
Identification-based trust
Identification with the others desires and intentions. Trust
exists because the parties effectively understand and
appreciate each others wants; mutual understanding is
developed to the point that each can effectively act for the
other.


10-18
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Key Elements in Managing
Negotiations within Relationships
Trust (cont.)
Trust is different from distrust
Trust is considered to be confident positive expectations of
anothers conduct
Distrust is defined as confident negative expectations of
anothers conduct i.e., we can confidently predict that
some other people will act to take advantage of us
Trust and distrust can co-exist in a relationship


10-19
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Actions To Manage Different Forms
of Trust in Negotiations
How to increase calculus-based trust
Create and meet the other party's expectations
Stress the benefits of creating mutual trust
Establish credibility; make sure statements are honest and accurate
Keep promises; follow through on commitments
Develop a good reputation
How to increase identification-based trust
Develop similar interests
Develop similar goals and objectives
Act and respond like the other
Stand for the same principles, values and ideals

10-20
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Actions To Manage Different Forms
of Trust in Negotiations
How to manage calculus-based distrust
Monitor the other partys actions
Prepare formal agreements
Build in plans for inspecting and verifying commitments
Be vigilant of the others actions; monitor personal boundaries
How to manage identification-based distrust
Expect disagreements
Assume that the other party will exploit or take advantage of you;
monitor your boundaries regularly
Verify information, commitments and promises of the other party
Minimize interdependence and self-disclosure
The best offense is a good defense

10-21
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Recent Research on
Trust and Negotiation
Summary of findings about the relationships between
trust and negotiation behavior:
Many people approach a new relationship with an unknown
other party with remarkably high levels of trust
Trust tends to cue cooperative behavior
Individual motives also shape trust and expectations of the
others behavior
Trustors, and those trusted, may focus on different things as
trust is being built
The nature of the negotiation task can shape how parties judge
the trust

10-22
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Recent Research on
Trust and Negotiation
Summary of findings about the relationships between
trust and negotiation behavior (cont.):
Greater expectations of trust between negotiators leads to
greater information sharing
Greater information sharing enhances effectiveness in
achieving a good negotiation outcome
Distributive processes lead negotiators to see the negotiation
dialogue, and critical events in the dialogue, as largely about
the nature of the negotiation task.

10-23
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Recent Research on
Trust and Negotiation
Summary of findings about the relationships between
trust and negotiation behavior (cont.):
Trust increases the likelihood that negotiation will proceed on
a favorable course over the life of a negotiation
Face-to-face negotiation encourages greater trust development
than negotiation online
Negotiators who are representing others interests, rather than
their own interests, tend to behave in a less trusting way

10-24
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Key Elements in Managing
Negotiations within Relationships
Justice
Can take several forms:
Distributive justice
The distribution of outcomes
Procedural justice
The process of determining outcomes
Interactional justice
How parties treat each other in one-to-one relationships
Systemic justice
How organizations appear to treat groups of individuals
10-25
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Repairing a Relationship
Diagnostic steps in beginning to work on
improving a relationship:
What might be causing any present
misunderstanding, and what can I do to understand
it better?
What might be causing a lack of trust, and what
can I do to begin to repair trust that might have
been broken?
10-26
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Repairing a Relationship
Diagnostic steps (cont.):
What might be causing one or both of us to feel
coerced, and what can I do to put the focus on
persuasion rather than coercion?
What might be causing one or both of us to feel
disrespected, and what can I do to demonstrate
acceptance and respect?

10-27
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Repairing a Relationship
Diagnostic steps (cont.):
What might be causing one or both of us to get
upset, and what can I do to balance emotion and
reason?