Ch 10 - Relationship in Negotiations.ppt

Ch 10 - Relationship in Negotiations

1. 10-1
McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
CHAPTER TEN
Relationships in
Negotiation

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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. 10-10
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
buyer–seller transactions

11. 10-11
McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Four Key Dimensions of Relationships

12. 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 party’s outcomes as
well as their own
•Focus attention on the norms that develop about the
way that they work together

13. 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

14. 10-14
McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved
Key Elements in Managing
Negotiations within Relationships
•Reputation
•Trust
•Justice

15. 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 individual’s personal
characteristics and accomplishments.
–Develops over time; once developed, is hard to
change.
–Negative reputations are difficult to “repair”

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

17. 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 other’s desires and intentions. Trust
exists because the parties effectively understand and
appreciate each other’s wants; mutual understanding is
developed to the point that each can effectively act for the
other.

18. 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
another’s conduct
–Distrust is defined as confident negative expectations of
another’s 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

19. 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

20. 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 party’s actions
•Prepare formal agreements
•Build in plans for “inspecting” and verifying commitments
•Be vigilant of the other’s 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”

21. 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
other’s 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

22. 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.

23. 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 other’s interests, rather than
their own interests, tend to behave in a less trusting way

24. 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

25. 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?

26. 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?

27. 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?