Principle-Application Papers You will study many principles in this course.  The principles may be related to bargaining and negotiating or they may be related to cultural differences and methods to deal with those differences.  The more you apply the principles discussed to your own individual experience and opportunities, the more useful the class becomes and the more likely that you will remember and benefit in the future. I have to do 5 more PAP I will attach some slide we have in the class and I will also attach an example for it  it can be something out of the internet or an article that related to the negotiating principle. I could not upload more than 4 principles, but i added Leverge on (Foundations of Effective Negotiation). 6 attachments Slide 1 of 6 attachment_1 attachment_1 attachment_2 attachment_2 attachment_3 attachment_3 attachment_4 attachment_4 attachment_5 attachment_5 attachment_6 attachment_6 Name: Abdullah Alghonaim Date: 03/12/2020 Course: negotiation across culture Negotiating with friends when the stakes are high ?People in close relationships don’t make good deals ?They usually compromise without exploring value-add creative options ?Seek a third party’s help I had to buy playstation and a television. When I checked online it was $700.00 online for the both of them, so I started to explore my options for a while. I had mentioned to my friend what I was looking for and he was getting rid of both his playstation and television as well and getting new ones. His starting price for both was $600.00. I told him that for them both being used that price was too high. I explained to him that it would only be 100 more if I went ahead and just bought them new and I might as well get them new. He brought the price down to $550.00 and then I started negotiating that we were close friends and all I had done for him so he finally brought the price down to $450.00. Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Expectations Authoritative Standards and Norms Relationships The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Your Ethics in Bargaining Leverage Negotiation Style Long-term Orientation High/Low Context ?Competing ?Collaborating ?Compromising ?Avoiding ?Accommodating Opening and Making Concessions Closing and Gaining Commitment Ethics in Negotiation Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Expectations Authoritative Standards and Norms Relationships The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Opening and Making Concessions Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Your Goals and Expectations Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context ?Those who set goals in negotiations routinely outperform those who only set reserve or ‘walk-away’ levels. Closing and Gaining Commitment Ethics in Negotiation Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Expectations Authoritative Standards and Norms Relationships The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Opening and Making Concessions Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Authoritative Standards and Norms Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context ?Know the applicable standards and norms. Identify the ones the other party views as legitimate. Closing and Gaining Commitment Ethics in Negotiation Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Expectations Authoritative Standards and Norms Relationships The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Opening and Making Concessions Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Relationships Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context ?Gain credibility through relationship networks ?Build working relationships with small steps such as gifts, favors, disclosures, or concessions ?Avoid reciprocity and relationship traps Closing and Gaining Commitment Ethics in Negotiation Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Expectations Authoritative Standards and Norms Relationships The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Opening and Making Concessions Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context The Other Party’s Interests ?Locate the decision maker ?How might it serve the other party’s interests to help you achieve your goals. Closing and Gaining Commitment Ethics in Negotiation Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Leverage Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context ?Which side has the most to lose from no deal? ?For whom is time a factor? ?Can I improve my alternatives or make the other party’s worse? Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context Preparing Your Strategy ?Situational matrix Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Exchanging Information Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context ?Establish rapport ?Obtain information (probe and disclose) ?Signal leverage Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context Opening and Making Concessions ?Open/Concession/Situation Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context Closing and Gaining Commitment ?Bargaining/Closing/Situation Tactical matrix Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Ethics in Negotiation Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context ?What are your ethics? ?Use of relationships to avoid being taken advantage of ?Probe, probe, probe. Don’t take things at face value ?Don’t have to answer every question ?Don’t lie. Use truth to your advantage Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context Power Distance ?The extent to which less powerful members within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Individualism Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context ?The perspective that the identity of an individual is his or her own vs. derived from his/her collective group. Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context Masculinity ?Relatively strong form of societallevel sex-role differentiation Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context Uncertainty Avoidance ?The extent to which one accepts ambiguous situations and tolerates uncertainty. Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context Long-term Orientation ?The extent to which emphasis is placed on perseverance and savings for future betterment. Your Bargaining Style Your Goals and Authoritative Standards Relationships Expectations and Norms The Other Party’s Interests Leverage Opening and MakingClosing and Gaining Preparing Your Strategy Exchanging Information Ethics in Negotiation Concessions Commitment Power Distance Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Long-term Orientation High/Low Context HighLow Context ?The extent to which communication relies upon the face-value of what is said vs. the unspoken underlying context. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 The master is not he who begins but he who finishes. –Slovakian Folk Saying ? The scarcity effect is the powerful human tendency to want things more when we think the supply is running out ? Scarcity caused by many people wanting the same thing— competition ? Astute negotiators emphasize that what they have is in great demand and the supply is dwindling fast. They may discuss other offers or opportunities ? Scarcity caused by time running out—deadlines ? Negotiators who set deadlines imply that time is running out on the offer ? Sometimes particular terms of an offer have an ‘exploding’ deadline at which time that term will expire if not accepted ? Scarcity caused by walkouts ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 Over-commitment comes from our human desire to avoid admitting failure or accepting loss when we have invested heavily in a prior course of action or decision. The more time someone invests in an activity, the more committed he becomes to seeing it through even though the decision may no longer make sense. ? Some negotiators will ‘wait until the last minute’ at closing to spring some things upon the other side— understanding that they will be reluctant to walk away after getting so close to closing. ? ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 Situation Should I open? How to Open? Concession Strategy Closing Strategy Transactions When in doubt, don’t. But OK if you have good information Optimistically (highest or lowest figure supported by presentable argument) Firmness: Concede slowly in diminishing amounts toward expectation level Deadlines; walkouts; final offer; split the difference; 3rd party appraisal Balanced Concerns Same as above Fairly (highest or lowest figure supported by solid argument) Big moves on little issues, little moves on big issues; brainstorm options, present several packages at once All of the above; post-settlement settlement; Relationships Yes Generously Accommodation or fair compromise Split the difference; accommodation Tacit Coordination Yes but avoid conflict if possible Do whatever it takes to solve the problem Accommodation Accommodation ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? ? ? ? Negotiations harness one of human nature’s most basic psychological drives: our need to maintain (at least in our own eyes) an appearance of consistency and fairness in our words and deeds. We like to maintain consistency by appealing to established standards. If we deviate too far from established standards, we may appear to be unreasonable. Examples of ‘established standards’ ? Interest rates ? Car buying guides ? Real estate ‘comparables’ ? Earnings multiples ? Profitability ? Efficiency ? ROI ? Others? ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 Must find the standards that apply in your negotiation Be ready to respond to arguments the other side has and the standards they will most likely use. ? If the standards are open to interpretation. Be prepared to argue your range of the interpretation and argue against the other sides interpretation. ? Humans have a psychological need to be perceived as reasonable. This is the ‘consistency principle’ ? We are more open to persuasion when we perceive a proposed course of action as being consistent with a course we have already adopted. ? ? ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 The skillful use of standards, norms, and coherent positioning to gain advantage or protect a position. ? You maximize your leverage when you use the standards and norms that the other party views as legitimate and relevant ? If you set up your own needs, standards, or entitlements as the basis for the negotiation, you will not inspire agreement. ? Anticipate the other side’s standards and frame your proposal within them. (Use ‘their’ words) ? ? If not possible to do this, prepare to argue for a special exception from the other party’s standard. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? A consistency trap pre-commits you to a seemingly innocent standard and then confronts you with the logical implications of the particular case. ? ‘Would you like to save some money?’ ? ‘Don’t you think a fair price for the company would reflect comparable sales of similar companies? ? How to avoid consistency traps…? ? Be alert to them. Slow the pace. ? Turn the table and ask the questions ? Qualify your answers. Use your own words and very broad definitions that leave room for future interpretations. ? If caught in an inconsistency…? ? A. Adjust your position to conform to the standard ? Admit that you made a mistake when you initially agreed with the standard ? Use an audience or third party ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? A crisp memorable phrase or framework that defines the problem that you are attempting to solve in the negotiation. ? UPS and Teamster’s Union: ? ‘Part –time America won’t work’ ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Humans are inclined to defer to authority ? Some cultures are more this way than others ? Negotiators use many ways to play on this human inclination to defer… ? Long, authoritative-looking standard form contracts in legalese ? ‘Company policy’ ? ‘Standard procedure’ ? ‘Industry standard’ or ‘Industry norm’ ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Why is it so hard to see things from the other party’s perspective? ? Common human limitation of seeing things through the lens of our own interests –also known as ‘partisan perceptions.’ ? We bring a competitive attitude to negotiations and assume conflict of interest rather than shared interest. ? The dynamics of the negotiation become the end rather than the means; i.e., we ‘bluff’ about our true interests in order to win concessions ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? 1. Identify the decision maker ? Companies set policies but PEOPLE negotiate. ? Must find out the interests of the DECISION MAKER. They may not be the same as the one doing the negotiating ? 2. Look for common ground: How might it serve the other party’s interests to help you achieve your goals? ? Try role playing with role reversal ? As a consumer, what shared interests do you have? What conflicting interests to you have? Are there shared interests that might trump the conflicting interests? ? Two prices for things: The full price for those who are easy to satisfy who dislike negotiation and the discounted price for those willing to ask for it. Which price do you pay? ? ‘I would be a really satisfied customer if you could ………’ ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? 3. Identify interests that might interfere with agreement: Why might the other party say ‘No’? ? It is often what you think but sometimes not ? 4. Search for low-cost options that solve the other party’s problems while advancing your goals. ? Example of Kelly Sarber and Oceanside, California ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? All of us negotiate, many times per day… ? As children, we negotiated for attention, for treats, and for a bigger allowance ? As adults, we negotiate for… ? Attention ? Treats ? A bigger allowance Negotiation is an interactive communication process that may take place whenever we want something from someone else or someone else wants something from us. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? ‘Trades would not take place unless it were advantageous to the parties concerned. Of course, it is better to strike as good a bargain as one’s bargaining position permits. The worst outcome is when, by overreaching greed, no bargain is struck, and a trade that could have been advantageous to both parties does not come off at all.’ –Benjamin Franklin ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Remember the conference table example that rewarded with $1,000 the first 2 people who could convince the person across from them to come stand behind their chair? What would you have done? Really? ? Avoid ? Sit tight. Do nothing. Suspect a trick. Worry about looking dumb. ? ‘I don’t like to negotiate and so I don’t do it unless I have to…’ ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Compromise ? Offer to split the $1,000 with the other person if they will run to stand behind your chair ? Accommodation ? Immediately, without an agreement, get up and run and stand behind your counterpart’s chair, trusting that s/he will share the $1,000 with you ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Competitive ? Promise to split the money and then not do so; Tell the other person you have a broken leg and can’t run so they need to run behind your chair ? Collaborative ? Both parties simultaneously run to get behind each other’s chairs thus both getting $1,000 ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Accommodating ? Derive satisfaction from solving other peoples’ problems. ? Good relationship building skills ? Sensitive to others’ emotional states, body language, and verbal signals Weakness: May place too much importance on relationship May be vulnerable to more competitive people Low accommodators more concerned about being right than being persuasive ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Compromising ? Eager to close the deal by closing the gap in negotiations ? Look for fair standards and formulae that will allow them to close the deal quickly ? Perceived as a ‘reasonable person’ Weakness: May rush the negotiations too quickly Do not ask enough questions May accept the ‘standard’ offered too readily Low compromisers are ‘men and women of principle’ More concerned with winning an argument than closing a deal ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Avoiding ? Adept at deferring and dodging the confrontational aspects of negotiation ? May be perceived as having graceful tact and diplomacy ? Possibly great team member on high conflict team Weakness: May become bottlenecks when conflict is part of the function of an organization Problems only get worse if not addressed Miss many opportunities to get things that were never asked for Low avoiders have no fear of conflict. They may even enjoy it. They can fight hard all day against the other side and be friendly with them that night over dinner. They may be perceived as tactless troublemakers. They have little patience for bureaucracy or office politics. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Collaborating ? Enjoy negotiations because they enjoy solving tough problems in engaged interactive ways ? Skilled at discovering basic interests, perceptions, and new solutions ? Honestly committed to finding the best solution for everyone involved Weakness: May make a simple issue overly complicated May be taken advantage of if they don’t also have competing skills Low collaborators want to stick to the agenda, the issues, and their prepared plan. They may get frustrated at creative brainstorming. One way to deal with this is to take breaks to allow a low collaborator to re-focus and adjust to the new situation ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Competing ? Love to negotiate because it presents opportunity to win or lose ? They love to WIN ? Have strong instincts about leverage, deadlines, opening, closing, ultimatums, etc. This is a game and they get to keep score. Weakness: May be hard on relationships Might hurt the long-term potential of a deal May put too much focus on things that can be counted Low competors will be perceived as ‘non-threatening’ which can be an advantage. They look at negotiations as a dance rather than a game. When high stakes are on the table, they may be at a disadvantage. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? ? Critical skill that is practiced constantly Anxiety about negotiating hurts us… ? Limits our ability to ‘think on our feet’ ? Narrows our perspective of the problem ? No single, one-size-fits-all strategy for negotiating ? Too many situations and variables for single effective strategy that is best in all cases ? ? ? Adapt to differences realistically and intelligently Maintain ethics and self-respect All deals that close are ‘win-win’ ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? You already have what it takes to be a competent negotiator ? Identify your own strength and weaknesses ? Plan carefully ? Sharpen your tools through practice ? Learn to be yourself at the bargaining table ? Tricks and strategies that don’t feel comfortable won’t work for you ? No need to be tricky ? Great need to be alert and smart ? The best negotiators… ? ? ? ? Play it straight Ask lots of questions Listen carefully Concentrate on what each side is trying to accomplish through the negotiations ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Solid planning and preparation before you start ? Careful listening so you can find out what the other side really wants ? Attending to the ‘signals’ the other party sends once the negotiation has begun ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Involves zero (fixed) sum games ? One person’s gain varies inversely with another person’s gain. ? Almost directly conflicting interests ? Each party is attempting to maximize his/her share of the fixed sum. ? Simply dividing the pie ? However, parties do not generally know how large the pie is. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? BATNA: Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement ? What will you do if there is no deal? ? BATNA = Power ? Crucial preparation: Prior to the negotiation, develop the most attractive BATNA you can ? Reservation Point (RP): The bottom line; the point at which a negotiator is indifferent between a negotiated agreement and an impasse. ? Must determine the BATNA first, then can set the RP ? Target: Each side’s goals or aspirations; the most each party reasonably hopes to achieve in the negotiation ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? The bargaining zone is the space between the buyer’s RP and the seller’s RP. ? Positive Bargaining Zone ? If RP(s) < RP(b), then a zone of possible agreement exists. ? Size of the pie = RP(b) – RP(s) ? Negative Bargaining Zone ? If RP(s) > RP(b), then a zone of possible agreement does not exist. ? If cost of continuing is too high, walk away. If not, search for way to bridge the gap. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? What is your BATNA? Why? ? What is your reservation price? Why? ? What is your target? Why? ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? How did negotiations evolve? ? What strategies and tactics were used? ? How was the final price decided? ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Discovering the other party’s RP ? Assess other’s outcome values and costs of terminating negotiations ? Influencing the other party’s RP ? Manage other’s impression of outcome values ? Screening; selective presentation ? Modify other’s perception of outcome values ? Highlighting/concealing something overlooked ? Manipulate actual costs of delay or termination ? Disruptive action; manipulation of schedule ? The key is INFORMATION: What do you know about them? What do they know about you? ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 Leverage is having something the other guy wants. Or, better yet, needs. Or, best of all, simply cannot do without.’ –Donald Trump The most important factor of all those so far reviewed ? Leverage is your power to obtain agreement on your own terms. ? Leverage is the balance of needs and fears ? We pay close attention to the other party’s needs. However, the purpose in doing so is NOT to help them achieve their goals but to ensure that we obtain OURS. ? Leverage is DYNAMIC, not static. It can change moment to moment ? The better your BATNA, the greater your leverage ? Which side needs the deal more to achieve its goals? That side has less leverage. ? ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 Always ask and assess: Which side has the most to lose from ‘no deal’? ? Three types of leverage: ? ? 1. Positive leverage—the relative ability of each side to provide things that the other party wants. ? Every time the other party says, ‘I want’ you can be gaining leverage. ? This leverage comes from not only being able to provide what the other side wants but also in knowing their true needs ? 2. Negative leverage—the relative ability of each side to take away things the other currently has. ? ? ? ? Potential losses loom larger in the human mind than do equivalent gains. Threats need to be carefully used. Hints are more effective than shouts. Threats are like dealing with explosives. Everyone can be hurt If threatened in negotiation, prepare to fight fire with fire. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Three types of leverage: ? 3. Normative leverage—leverage based on application of the consistency principle ? Opportunities that will be lost if the parties fail to reach a deal ? Threats to each party’s status quo ? Loss of self-esteem should a party’s actions appear inconsistent with a prior or professed standard ? ? The party with the most to lose has the least leverage The party with the least to lose has the most leverage ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Your goal is to alter the situation (or at least the other party’s perception of the situation) so you have less to lose, the other side has more to lose, or both. ? Gain more information about what the other side really needs ? Acquire credible power to make the other side worse off ? Frame your needs under principles and norms that the other side will have difficulty walking away from ? Bind yourself to a course of action that forces the other side to concede ? Improve your BATNA by seeking alternative solutions to your underlying problem that do NOT require the other party’s cooperation ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Group dynamics often favor those who first achieve ‘others’ buy-in and support ? Assemble coalitions before the meeting starts ? ‘Nemawashi’ – ‘digging around the roots’ ? ? ‘Social Proof’ – In ambiguous situations, people take their cues from what other people do Coalitions can improve your position and make the other party’s position worse ? Example: Northern Plains Premium Beef ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Misconception #1: Leverage and power are the same thing ? Example: When your toddler doesn’t want to eat his vegetables ? Bribes? ? Threats? ? Something else? ? Acknowledge the leverage, appeal to shared interest ? Regardless of how important you are, you had better treat carefully those people who control the decision that you want made. ? Ask: ‘What do I control that the other side wants?’ ‘What do they control that I want?’ ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Misconception #2: Leverage is a constant that doesn’t change ? Leverage is dynamic, not static ? Leverage changes and negotiations proceed ? Therefore, there are some times that are better than others for making needs known and insisting they be met. ? Timing matters in negotiations ? Example: Negotiating salary, benefits, perks, etc. ? You improve your chances of success when you ask for things at the time when your leverage is high ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Misconception #3: Leverage depends on the facts ? Leverage depends on the other party’s perception of the situation, not the facts. ? You have the leverage the other side THINKS you have ? This can also work against you… ? You may think the other side has a stronger position than they really do ? You may be in a good position but they may not believe y0u ? Example: Your ability as an employee ? Example: The quality of performance of your product/service ? You must do what it takes to let the other side know of your leverage ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? Leverage works differently (or it should) within families, firms, and organizations than it does in competitive marketplaces ? Example: Better ‘walkaways’ improve leverage in competitive marketplace but does not work in families, firms, and organizations ? Example: In families, firms, and organizations, we rely more on normative leverage with the norms being the values the group share ? Example: In the competitive marketplace, signs of urgency decrease our leverage. However, in families, firms, and organizations, this urgency and passion may increase our leverage—especially if it is not often resorted to. ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 ? ? ? ? ? ? Which side has the most to lose from no deal? For whom is time a factor? Can I improve my alternatives or make the other party’s worse? Can I gain control over something the other party needs? Can I commit the other party to norms that favor my result? Can I form a coalition to improve my position? ‘Bargaining for Advantage;’ G. Richard Shell; Penguin Books 2006 Purchase answer to see full attachment Explanation & Answer: 5 Papers 1 Page Each Tags: Negotiating Across Cultures Foundations of Effective Negotiation bargaining and negotiating User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.