Book Summary of Negotiation by Roy J. Lewicki, David M. Saunders, and John W. Minton
Citation:
Negotiation, 3rd edition, Roy J. Lewicki, David M. Saunders, and John W. Minton, (Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill, 1999).
This Book Summary written by: Conflict Research Consortium Staff
Readers will find this textbook on negotiations to be broadly accessible
and very informative. The third edition has been substantially updated
and revised to reflect current negotiations research. Thirteen chapters
are presented in four parts. The first chapters focus on the basic
elements of conflict and negotiation. Part Two examines the processes
of communication, persuasion, and ethical judgment. Part Three explores
external influences on negotiations, including the social context, coalition
or group participation, individual personality differences, and cultural
factors. The final chapters discuss ways for parties and third-parties
to address breakdowns in the negotiation process. The text includes
a bibliography and a comprehensive index.
Negotiation Basics
The negotiation situation is characterized by two or more interdependent
parties who have a conflict of interest, and who choose to address that
conflict by striving to reach an agreement through a process of mutual
adjustment of each party's demands and concessions. Conflicts may
arise at different levels, from within an individual to between groups
or nations. Parties may address conflict by avoidance, by yielding
to or accommodating the other, by competing to dominate the other, by compromising
to split gains and losses, or by collaborative problem-solving to reach
maximally beneficial mutual agreements. When managed appropriately,
conflict can be constructive.
Pre-negotiation planning is the key to successful negotiations. Before
opening negotiations, parties need to frame the problem at hand, define
their goals, select a negotiating strategy, and develop a plan for implementing
that strategy. Specific planning steps include defining and prioritizing
the issues and interests, developing supporting arguments, analyzing the
other party, assessing the other side's priorities, and setting targets
and limits, How parties frame (understand, view or define) the conflict
has a significant impact on what goals they adopt, and on the possibility
of achieving a mutually beneficial outcome. Understanding the phases
that negotiation processes typically go through will help negotiators plan
more effectively.
Generally, negotiations come in two forms. In distributive (win-lose,
competitive) bargaining, each party tries to secure the most benefit for
themselves, without regard for the other side's outcome. In integrative
(win-win, collaborative) bargaining, both parties work together to achieve
maximum mutual gains. Distributive bargaining is more appropriate
when resources are fixed and the parties' interests are directly opposed.
Distributive negotiations are defined by each party's opening, resistance
and target points, that is, their initial offers, their lowest acceptable
bid, and their desired bid. Each party's goal is to close a deal as near
to the other's resistance point as possible. Distributive negotiation strategies
seek to conceal the party's resistance point, uncover the other side's
resistance point, or to influence their views of what is possible.
Integrative negotiation is possible when the parties share concern for
each other's positive outcome. The presence of shared goals, trust, and
clear communication between the parties will facilitate effective integrative
negotiation. Often, seemingly distributive situations may be reframed
to permit integrative solutions. To be successful, integrative negotiators
must focus on their commonalties and engage in a free flow of information.
They must understand each other's interests and needs, and must seek solutions
which satisfy both sides.
Processes
Communication is central to the negotiation process. Miscommunication can
arise from mistakes in formulating a message, from errors in transmission
or from misinterpretation by the receiver. The likelihood of communication
errors increases when parties are in conflict or dislike each other. Parties
are also prone to mistakes in perception. Misperceptions arise from
stereotyping, projection, and selective perception. The parties conflict
frame also shapes their perceptions. Negotiators in conflict regularly
make a common set of cognitive errors. The text identifies eleven:
"irrational escalation of commitment, mythical fixed-pie beliefs, anchoring
and adjustment, framing, availability of information, the winner's curse,
overconfidence, the law of small numbers, self-serving biases, ignoring
other's cognitions, and reactive devaluation."(p. 174) These errors can
be addressed by a variety of techniques including the use of clarifying
questions, role reversal and reframing.
Leverage refers to the use of power to gain a temporary advantage over
the other party. Power in negotiations typically comes from having
information and expertise, from having control over resources, or from
one's position within an organization. Leverage tools fall into four
categories: ways of enhancing the effectiveness of messages, ways of enhancing
the sender's credibility or attractiveness, ways that receivers can elicit
or resist messages, and ways of arranging the larger context to reinforce
one's messages. The text describes a number of specific techniques
for exercising leverage.
Sometimes negotiators may resort to ethically questionable tactics.
Negotiators resort to unethical tactics in order to gain a power advantage.
Research has shown the women, older people, more experienced negotiators,
and people with training in the liberal arts or ethics are less predisposed
to use questionably ethical tactics. Research has also found
that negotiators are more likely to use unethical tactics in the context
of short term or hostile relationships, when they are the more powerful
party ("power corrupts"), when they are representing others, or when pressured
by organizational or cultural norms. When confronted with another's
unethical behavior, negotiators may ignore it, respond in kind, point out
the unethical behavior, or try to discuss the other's reasons for resorting
to unethical tactics. The authors conclude that "negotiators frequently
overlook the fact that, although unethical or expedient tactics may get
them what they want in the short run, these same tactics typically lead
to diminished effectiveness in the long run."(p. 263)
Contexts
The nature of the parties' relationship affects their negotiations, as
does the presence of an audience. When a dispute arises in an existing
relationship, negotiators must consider the impact of negotiations on the
future of the relationship. Managing negotiations within an existing
relationship requires building trust, fostering positive emotions, and
attending to issues of justice and fairness. An audience may consist
of team members, constituents or by-standers. The presence of an
audience pressures negotiators to appear tough and unyielding. Negotiating
partners pressure each other to be flexible and conciliatory.
Fortunately, there are a number of strategies to manage this tension.
Multiparty negotiations may involve multiple parties each pursuing their
own ends, or may be aimed at reaching a group consensus. In interest-based
multiparty negotiations, parties usually form various coalitions to increase
their power. Coalitions may dissolve and reform over the course of negotiations.
The authors offer advice on building coalitions, and outline basic coalition
behavioral dynamics. Consensus-oriented negotiations are much more
complex that two-party negotiations. Thorough pre-negotiation planning
is crucial. The multiparty negotiation process usually involves group
discussions, bilateral negotiations and coalition building. The text
describes key ways for the chairperson to manage negotiations.
People's personality traits also affect negotiations, although researchers
have found it difficult to isolate specific traits and effects. The
five basic approaches to conflict (avoidance, accommodation, competition,
compromising or collaborating) may also represent individual's predispositions
toward dealing with conflict. Researchers have investigated the effect
of Machiavellian attitudes on negotiation behavior, as well as the impact
of interpersonal trust, perspective-taking ability, perceived self-efficacy,
and self-monitoring. Much recent research has been devoted to the
issue of gender in negotiation. There is substantial evidence that
men and women are treated differently in negotiations, to women's detriment.
Investigations regarding differences in negotiation style have yielded
contradictory results; some indicate gender differences, some show none.
The effect of cultural differences on negotiation has also been subject
to much recent research. Negotiators from different cultures may
differ in their acceptance of egalitarian or inegalitarian power distributions,
their tendency toward collectivism or individualism, the extent to which
they hold stereotypically masculine or feminine values, and in their tolerance
for uncertainty. Cultural factors can influence the parties definition
of negotiation, their selection of negotiators, the choice of negotiation
protocol and timing, their willingness to take risks, and the form that
any settlement takes. The authors describe eight strategies negotiators
may choose from to manage cultural differences, depending their level of
familiarity with the other culture.
Managing Negotiation Difficulties
Negotiations may breakdown or stalemate for a number of reasons.
The final chapters describe some common sources of impasse, and offer techniques
for restarting stalled negotiations. Negotiations may reach an impasse
when conflicts become entrenched in hostility, or when the number of issues
increases. Integrative negotiations may stall if parties are unable to
invent mutually beneficial options Negotiations can be blocked when one
party is negotiating integratively, and the other is bargaining distributively.
Parties in entrenched conflicts should seek to enhance their communication,
reduce tensions, control the size and number of issues, sweeten available
offers, and focus on identifying common ground. Integrative
negotiators must guard against people's tendency to repress criticism and
dissent when under the pressure of a deadline, or for the sake of maintaining
their relationship. The authors also offer step-by-step strategies
that one party can use to handle difficult or contentious opponents, and
draw them around to more productive, integrative negotiating behavior.
Sometimes stalled negotiations may benefit from the intervention of
a third-party. Arbitrators hear each side's positions and arguments
and then decide on the appropriate outcome. The advantage of arbitration
is a speedy and a clear-cut resolution. The drawbacks are that its
availability reduces the parties' willingness to do the hard work of negotiation,
and that parties are less committed to imposed settlements. Mediators
assist the parties in conducting their negotiations. Mediators may
make substantive contributions to the process, but have no formal power
over the outcome. Mediation is a voluntary process. Mediator
styles vary widely. Research shows that mediation is most effective
in moderate conflicts, when negotiators are inexperienced, or when negotiations
have reached a hurting stalemate. Process consultants focus more exclusively
on improving the parties' communication and conflict management skills.
Organizations are increasingly implementing dispute resolution systems,
that is, systems of established procedures for handling disputes that arise
between employees, customers, or members. Such systems usually draw
on alternative dispute resolution approaches to constructively managing
conflict.
|
