I wrote down this thought paper about negotiation after taking a relevant class.
This paper is composed of eight parts:
Understanding of negotiation
Common biases
Importance of preparation
Innovation & customization
Psychological influence
Ethical issues
Fairness
My personal weaknesses and action plans (competing style and group negotiation)
Negotiation is both an art and an science. It require critical thinking and strong logic while demanding our interpersonal skills and emotional intelligence. Negotiation is not just about how to improve our work and business, but about the philosophy of how to be a good person who could closely connected with others and be mutual beneficial. Putting effective negotiation techniques into practice increases the probability that each party will achieve more rewards than would otherwise be the case.
We have default ways of processing and seeing things that can sometimes get in the way of making optimal decisions. The following common biases should be noticed and avoided. First, we may assume a mythical fixed-pie in advance while failed to make a integrative agreement that fulfill the interests of both sides. Second, we may give too much weight to an initial offer too early in the negotiation, and the initial anchor may minimize the amount of information and the depth of thinking we use to evaluate a situation. Third, our behavior in a negotiation is not always rational but reflects our risk appetite and emotional attachment. Fourth, we may be overconfident and therefore less likely to compromise, even based on accurate assessment. Finally, we may assign too much weight on available information rather than truly reliable information. Therefore, I should assess the degree to which both I and my opponent might be affected by those biases, and construct corresponding strategies.
Preparation is the key to successful negotiation. To well prepare for a negotiation, I should focus on the two main components of rational negotiation process. First, I should objectively evaluate each party’s alternatives, interests and priorities. Second, I should understand integrative and distributive negotiation, trying to enlarge the pie of available resources and increase my share. Some critical information should be considered in advance, such as both parties’ BATNA (best alternatives to a negotiated agreement), target (desired outcome), bargaining zone, reservation price, interests, priorities, and strategies. Specific strategies could be made. For example, if I don’t know much information, I should not be the first person to offer a price.
Another important lesson I learned was that, instead of silently choosing existing options, I should create innovative and integrative alternatives. For example, in the Kukui Nuts Negotiation, both parties could attain 3000 kukui nuts according to respective interests, rather than simply dividing the 3000 kukui nuts. Moreover, in the Elm Street negotiation, although it seems like an independent transaction, several contracts could be made simultaneously to fulfill the needs of all the parties. What is more, in the Project Management negotiation, I created a new job title based on my project management knowledge to maximize my potentials, rather than choosing a existing position inside a project. I should always remember, rules can be changed by people, and customized solutions should be designed based on interests.
In the negotiation, besides absolute power and distributive interests, psychological influence also plays an important role. People are emotional animals. We usually give back the similar treatment we have received and are more likely to agree with someone who we like. In addition, we are reluctant to to be inconsistent with our initial ideas or behaviors. Furthermore, if we demonstrate our knowledge or scarce resources, we are more likely to persuade others successfully. Therefore, when preparing a negotiation, I should fully evaluate my personal strengths and resources, and construct a strategy to take full advantage of the psychological power.
Ethical issues are also of high importance in negotiation. In the Elm Street negotiation, both parties have some hide information. The seller knew that the basement might have a leak, while the buyer wants to acquire the building for business purpose. To deal with these kinds of ethical dilemma in the future, I should comply with general ethical standards such as organizational standards and mentors, and if possible, I can use some techniques as follows. First, I could ask myself whether it feels right. Then, I can use a newspaper test, imagining what if my parents and friends got to know what I did. Finally, I should follows the Golden Rule – “do unto others as I would have others do unto myself”.
Besides ethical issues, fairness is significant. People are irrational. If we found that the other side apparently would take more benefits, we won’t achieve that agreement even if we can gain something individually. Therefore, one the one hand, I should control our emotions when making important decisions. On the other hand, I should consider my opponent’s sense of fairness.
In summary, to be an expertise in negotiation, I should follow rational negotiation preparation and process, design integrative and customized solution with my opponent according to our interests, and pay attention to ethical issues and psychological factors. Of course, continuously learning, feedbacks and reflections also guide my way forward, since merely learning from experience is ineffective.
Finally, I noticed my weaknesses in negotiation and made corresponding action plans.
Frist, according to TKI Conflict Mode Instrument and negotiation style questionnaire, I realized that I have a competing negotiation style. I may become too focused on winning a negotiation rather than on my true underlying interests. Sometimes, this cause me to miss out an integrative solution. To solve this problem, I should focus on interests, point out the true issues, and analyze whether there is an integrative solution. To find trade-offs and integrative agreements, I should firstly build trust and information with my opponent, and make multiple offers simultaneously to know their interests. If possible, I could add some issues to the negotiation to increase the potential for making mutually beneficial trade-offs, and reduce the scarcity of the resources that is creating the conflict between the two parties. Moreover, to make a good decision, I should gather reliable information and make accurate evaluation, trying not to be too over-confident that I am more likely to achieve a better result than my opponent.
To best guarantee my interests, I can employ TIT FOR TAT’s strategy. If the opponent also wants a integrative approach, I will support that. If not, I will then switch back to my competing style and squeeze every benefit from this person. I should make clear that I will reciprocate any cooperation and any defection.
Secondly, I am also weak at group negotiation.
For example, in the Entrepreneur Negotiation, I needed to work with a partner. That negotiation was much harder and more time-consuming. I had no clues to divide our roles and assignments. When we began our negotiation, no synergy was created by our cooperation. In the future, for group negotiation, I should first discuss the priorities and preferences among issues with the other partner, divide the negotiation resources and roles, and try to focus on the same goal. In addition, communication could be practiced and planned.
Another example was in Endowed Chair Group Discussion. In the very beginning, I did not think about what the discussion process should be like, but directly started it. I also experienced group thinking. Before this discussion, I had already written down the right discussion process to make a wise decision. However, a person wanted to make a quick decision and save 10-20 minutes to rest, and nobody disagreed. As result, I compromised. During the discussion, I also failed to stick to my original thoughts and did not pay adequate attention to unique information. At the end, all the other members chose Chris, and I compromised again. To solve this problem in the future group discussions, I should build meta-knowledge and know about what each member knows. As a leader, I need to design discussion process in the very beginning and set appropriate problem solving goals. During discussion, I should frequently review my own ideas to avoid losing any important point. If I have some ideas, I am supposed to speak out aloud. I should also collect as much information as possible from individual team members, because they may have unique information. Directing group attention to unshared information using T-group is also helpful. We should assign equal weight to unshared information and to shared information. Moreover, I should suspend initial judgement. If possible, I could try increasing the size of the group.
Furthermore, in the Survival Negotiation, I failed to fully analyze the context. The seemingly simple background actually contained much meaningful information. To analyze the situation, I should survey everyone’s interests, and do not get caught up in power plays.
Comments