Common Confusion about the Negotiation Process

 

The process of negotiation often is confused with other decision-making process such as litigation. Many people have a perception of how the litigation process works, and they conduct themselves in the negotiating process much like they believe people should conduct themselves in the litigation process. As а result, they are far too adversarial and argumentative, thereby creating unnecessary problems for themselves.

The second confusion is the belief that the essence of negotiation is extremely complex when in reality the essence is quite simple and very human. The negotiation process provides the parties or disputants an opportunity for parties to exchange promises and commitments through which they will resolve their differences and reach an agreement. Trust is key to the success of any negotiation. Groups and individuals will not exchange promises or commitments that they really expect to see fulfilled with groups or individuals they do not trust. When trust is low, communication is low. When communication is low, mutual education cannot take place, and education is the most constructive thing that can take place in any negotiation.

The third confusion is the idea that negotiation is а simple process. People believe that all you do is sit there, and if you are not the spokesperson, you take а few notes, make а few comments, and caucus, and the negotiations somehow go forward.

The described position has been expanded (and then checked) successfully from bilateral relationships (commercial transactions, labor-management relationships) to trilateral relationships (as in partnerships with three principals) to multilateral relationships (environmental, community and international disputes) and expanded further tо include various neutral third-party involvement, such as conciliation, mediation, fact-finding, and arbitration.

 

1. What is the difference between litigation process and negotiation? Is it crucial?

2. What is the essence of the negotiation?

3. Do you believe negotiation is а simple or very complex process? Prove your position.

4. How and where could the position mentioned by the author be applied?

5. Do you consider mastering the negotiation (bargaining) to be important for your future profession and why? Is it true for any field of activity.

EXERCISE 4. Train your thinking and communicating.

Translate one of the passages out of the text from English into Russian using your dictionary in written form. Discuss current economic or political actions of the state officials or business leaders in solving complex problems in terms of given rules.

 

Rules of thumb – практические правила

 

Some Rules of Thumb

 

1. A validdistinction can be drawn between relationship issues (such as those of perception, emotion, ability to communicate, mutual understanding, confidenceand trust) and the substantive issues or merits of negotiation (such as questions of price, date, specifications, and other terms of a possible agreement).

Rules of thumb:

- Deal with both sets of issues concurrently, but separately.

- Do not try to obtain concessions by threatening a relationship. (Threatening a relationship damages it; even getting a concession will not repair the damage.)

- Do not try to improve a bad relationship by making concessions. (Appeasemen t does not work; rewarding bad behavior is more likely to generate more bad behavior.)

- Disagree without being disagreeable. (The more serious the difference, the more important it is to be able to communicate effectively.)

- Insist that maintaining an effective working relationship connotesneither approval nor disapproval of conduct.

2. A validdistinction can be drawn between statements of position (demands, claims of right, things to be insisted upon) and the underlying interests which those positions are intended to serve (wants, needs, concerns, hopes, and fears).

Rules of thumb:

- Look behind positions for underlying interests.

- Avoid arguing about positions. (It tends to lock you both in.)

- Talk about interests, theirs and yours.

- See the negotiation task as one of reconciling legitimate interests, not compromising position.

 

3. A valid distinction can be drawn between generating options

(a range of possibilities that may be worthy of consideration) and making decisions (committing oneself to accept or reject a given option).

Rules of thumb:

- First generate many possible ways of resolving a difference; decide later.

- Each side should generate range of options privately before getting involved in formal negotiations.

- Where possible, the parties should engage in side-by-side joint brainstorming, free from making any commitments.

- 4. A validdistinction can be drawn between focusing discussions on what the parties are willing or unwilling to do and what the parties ought to do, as measured by some objective criteria (such as precedent, law, custom, expert option or minimum cost).

Rules of thumb:

- Insist upon talking about what the parties ought to do.

- Convert a contest of will (in support of unprincipled, stubborn positions) into a battle for legitimacy (as each side seeks to demonstrate that it is more willing than the other to accept a result dictated by respect for fair and impartial principles).

- Jointly search for fair standards to which both parties can defer.

EXERCISE 5. Increase your skills in translating and rendering.

 

Translate one of the passages of the texts from Russian into English in written form. Look through the text and render it in English.

ЭТИКЕТ

 

1. Необходимость знания культурно-специфического этикета для внешнеэкономической деятельности, персонала продаж и рекламных сообщений как внутри страны, так и за ее пределами вполне очевидна.

Этикет, как правило, представляет приемлемые формы поведения в социальных ситуациях. Так, широко распространенный обычай трепать ребенка по голове в Америке, был бы неприемлем на Востоке, где гoлова считается священной.

Поведение, рассматриваемое как грубое или неприятное в одной культуре, может быть вполне приемлемым в другой. Распространенная и приемлемая американская привычка (для мужчин) — сидя, перекрещивать ноги, показывая подошву туфли, чрезвычайно оскорбительна в восточных странах. В этих странах подошву ноги или туфли никогда не показывают.

Отношение к чаевым может иметь различное этическое значение, демонстрируемое следующим примером. Во время своего визита в Китай президент Рейган купил несколько сувениров. Он отдал продавцу 10 юаней (4,35$) за покупку стоимостью 5 юаней и сказал тому оставить сдачу себе. Униженный торговец бросился за президентом и вернул ему сдачу.

Чаевые не разрешены в Китае и воспринимаются многими как оскорбление.

2. Особенностью японского этикета является то, что японский управляющий никогда не скажет «нет» во время прямых переговоров, так как это оценивается в японской культуре как невежливость. Вместо этого он скажет «это будет очень трудно», что на самом деле значит «нет». Японец, отвечающий «да» на просьбу, часто имеет в виду «да, я понимаю просьбу», а не «да, я согласен выполнить просьбу».

Западная культура рассматривает прямой взгляд в глаза собеседника как свидетельство открытости намерений, искренности и прямоты. Однако в восточных культурах, в Японии и в мусульманских странах прямой взгляд расценивается как агрессивность, грубость, нескромность или бесстыдство.

Итак, в отличие от различий вербального языка, различия в невербальных формах поведения чаще воспринимаются неверно. Собственный невербальный язык кажется естественным, а чужой - неестественным. Именно поэтому следует избегать ошибок в понимании, интерпретации и передаче невербальной информации.

 

PART 2.

 

EXERCISE 1.

A. Check your understanding

Read and translate the text carefully, looking up any new words in a list below or in a dictionary. Then retell it.

1. terms of reference – круг полномочий

2. suspicion – подозрение

A Four Stage Process

The pre-negotiation process may be reviewed as a complex stage.

Defining the Problem. The first stage is defining the problem. How people define the problem begins to determine what they will do about it. Trying to negotiate without recognizing that the negotiation will be impossible until the parties share some common definition at the problem leads to failure. The point to that efforts to deal constructively with the problem must begin with efforts to establish a common enough definition of the problem to assure that parties to a negotiation would at least be addressing the same issues.

Commitment to negotiate. The second phase in the process is producing a commitment to a negotiated settlement. Before leaders will negotiate they first have to come to the judgment that the present situation no longer serves their interests. This judgment can be complicated by the introduction of a time factor for instance. In addition to judging that the status qui is unacceptable, each party must judge that the substance of a fair settlement is available. They also need to believe there is no possibility of overcoming suspicion and achieving a secure and peaceful relationship with their adversaries. A third factor contributing to a commitment to a negotiated settlement is a judgment that the balance of forces will permit such a settlement We need to understand a lot more about how to analyze the balance of forces in a pre-negotiating situation and how they can be charged.

Arranging the Negotiation. The third phase is arranging a negotiation. Whereas the commitment to negotiate is a real decision the effort to arrange a specific negotiation tends to focus on more detailed terms of reference for the negotiation. This phase, along with the fourth, has received far more attention in the literature on negotiation and requires less attention. The central aim in this phase is to reach agreement on the objectives and procedures for the negotiation. One can leave in this phase for months and even years.

Negotiation Itself. The final stage of the process is negotiation itself. Negotiation lies only as the forth phase in a prolonged process where the pre-negotiating phase may take much more time and effort than the negotiation.