UNIT I his power to impose his ideas on all, after all one cant
please everyone.
Negotiation
Negotiation is a technique of discussing issues among one
selves and reaching to a conclusion benefiting all involved
in the discussion. It is one of the most ways to avoid
conflicts and tensions. When individuals do not agree with
each other, they sit together, discuss issues on an open
forum, negotiate with each other and come to an
alternative which satisfies all. In a laymans language it is
also termed as bargaining.
Please go through the above two real life situations once
again.
You want to go for a movie but you know that your
parents will never agree to your decision. Will you fight
with your parents? Obviously NO, instead you will sit with
them and try your level best to convince them and
negotiate with them without fighting and spoiling
everyones mood. Probably you will spend the coming
weekend with your parents if they allow you today for the
movie else you will negotiate with your friends so that
they agree for a noon show. Negotiation helps you to
achieve your goal without hurting anyone. Your goal in
this case is to go for a movie and you negotiate either with
your parents or friends to achieve the same.
In the second situation, Tom could not afford to lose the
CD player as it was an exclusive one, thus he tries to
negotiate with the store owner to lower the price so that it
suits his pocket and even the store owner earns his profit
as well.
Negotiation is essential in corporates as well as personal
lives to ensure peace and happiness.
Your boss asks you to submit a report within two working
days and you know that the report is a little critical one
and needs more time. Will you say a yes to your boss just
to please him? Your yes might make the boss happy then
but later you will land yourself in big trouble if you fail to
submit it within the desired time frame. Its always better
to negotiate with your boss rather than accepting
something which you know is difficult. Ask for some more
time from your boss or probably dont make an exhaustive
report. Negotiation is better as it would prevent spoiling
your relation with your superiors later.
Negotiator
An individual representing an organization or a position
who listens to all the parties carefully and comes to a
conclusion which is willingly acceptable to all is called the
negotiator.
Skills of a negotiator
A negotiator ideally should be impartial and neutral and
should not favour any one.
He needs to understand the situation and the parties well
and decide something which will benefit all.
It is not always that people will easily accept the
negotiators decision; they may counter it if they feel their
personal interests are not satisfied. In such a situation,
where the negotiator is left with no choice, he must use
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
A negotiator has to be a little tactful and smart enough to
handle all situations and reach to a conclusion.
Elements of Negotiation
Negotiation
Process + Behaviour + Substance (Agenda)
Process- The way individuals negotiate with each other is
called the process of negotiation. The process includes the
various techniques and strategies employed to negotiate
and reach to a solution.
Behaviour- How two parties behave with each other
during the process of negotiation is referred to as
behaviour. The way they interact with each other, the way
they communicate with each other to make their points
clear all come under behaviour.
Substance- There has to be an agenda on which individuals
negotiate. A topic is important for negotiation. In the first
situation, going for the late night movie was the agenda on
which you wanted to negotiate with your parents as well
as your friends.
Models of Negotiation
Let us go through various models of negotiation:
1. Win Win Model - In this model, each and every individual
involved in negotiation wins. No body is at loss in this
model and every one is benefited out of the negotiation.
This is the most accepted model of negotiation.
Let us understand it with the help of an example:
Daniel wanted to buy a laptop but it was an expensive
model. He went to the outlet and negotiated with the
shopkeeper to lower the price. Initially the shopkeeper
was reluctant but after several rounds of discussions and
persuasion, he quoted a price best suited to him as well as
Daniel. Daniel was extremely satisfied as he could now
purchase the laptop without burning a hole in his pocket.
The negotiation also benefited the store owner as he could
earn his profits and also gained a loyal customer who
would come again in future.
2. Win Lose Model - In this model one party wins and the
other party loses. In such a model, after several rounds of
discussions and negotiations, one party benefits while the
party remains dissatisfied.
Please refer to the above example once again where
Daniel wanted to buy a laptop. In this example, both
Daniel and the store owner were benefited out of the deal.
Let us suppose Daniel could not even afford the price
quoted by the storeowner and requests him to further
lower the price. If the store owner further lowers the
price, he would not be able to earn his profits but Daniel
would be very happy. Thus after the negotiation, Daniel
would be satisfied but the shopkeeper wouldnt. In a win
lose model, both the two parties are not satisfied, only one
of the two walks away with the benefit.
3. Lose Lose Model - As the name suggests, in this model, the
outcome of negotiation is zero. No party is benefited out
of this model.
1
 Had Daniel not purchased the laptop after several rounds
of negotiation, neither he nor the store owner would have
got anything out of the deal. Daniel would return empty
handed and the store owner would obviously not earn
anything.
In this model, generally the two parties are not willing to
accept each others views and are reluctant to
compromise. No discussions help.
Let us understand the above three models with an
example from the corporate world.
Mike got selected with a multinational firm of repute. He
was called to negotiate his salary with Sara- the HR Head
of the organization.
Case 1 - Sara quoted a salary to Mike, but Mike was not
too pleased with the figure. He insisted Sara to raise his
salary to the best extent possible. After discussions Sara
came out with a figure acceptable to Mike and she
immediately released his offer letter. Mike got his dream
job and Sara could manage to offer Mike a salary well
within the companys budgets - A Win win Situation (Both
the parties gained)
Case 2 - Sara with her excellent negotiation skills managed
to convince Mike at a little lower salary than he quoted.
Mike also wanted to grab the opportunity as it was his
dream job and he was eyeing it for quite some time now.
He had to accept the offer at a little lower salary than
expected. Thus in this negotiation, Mike was not
completely satisfied but Sara was - A win lose negotiation
Case 3 - Mike declined the offer as the salary quoted by
Sara did not meet his expectations. Sara tried her level
best to negotiate with Mike, but of no use.-A lose lose
model of negotiation. No body neither Mike nor Sara
gained anything out of this negotiation.
4. RADPAC Model of Negotiation
RADPAC Model of Negotiation is a widely used model of
negotiation in corporates.
Let us understand it in detail
Every alphabet in this model signifies something:
R - Rapport
A - Analysis
D - Debate
P - Propose
A - Agreement
C - Close
R - Rapport: As the name suggests, it signifies the relation
between parties involved in negotiation. The parties
involved in negotiation ideally should be comfortable with
each other and share a good rapport with each other.
A - Analysis: One party must understand the second party
well. It is important that the individual understand each
others needs and interest. The shopkeeper must
understand the customers needs and pocket, in the same
way the customer mustnt ignore the shopkeepers profits
as well. People must listen to each other attentively.
D - Debate: Nothing can be achieved without discussions.
This round includes discussing issues among the parties
involved in negotiation. The pros and cons of an idea are
evaluated in this round. People debate with each other
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
and each one tries to convince the other. One must not
lose his temper in this round but remain calm and
composed.
P - Propose: Each individual proposes his best idea in this
round. Each one tries his level best to come up with the
best possible idea and reach to a conclusion acceptable by
all.
A - Agreement: Individuals come to a conclusion at this
stage and agree to the best possible alternative.
C - Close: The negotiation is complete and individuals
return back satisfied.
Let us again consider Mike and Saras example to
understand RADPAC Model
R - Rapport between Mike and Sara. They must be
comfortable with each other and should not start the
negotiation right away. They must first break the ice. The
discussions must start with a warm smile and greetings.
A - Both Mike and Sara would try their level best to
understand each others needs. Mikes need is to grab the
opportunity while Sara wants to hire an employee for the
organization.
D - The various rounds of discussions between Mike and
Sara. Mike and Sara would debate with each other trying
to get what they want.
P - Mike would propose the best possible salary he can
work on while Sara would also discuss the maximum salary
her company can offer.
A - Both Mike and Sara would agree to each other, where
both of them would compromise to their best possible
extent.
C - The negotiation is complete and probably the next
course of action is decided, like in this case the next step
would be generation of the offer letter and its acceptance.
STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION
INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION
When a negotiation is integrative, it means that
negotiation is based on interest or otherwise negotiation
2
strategy which lay emphasis on win-win situation. The goal
of Integrative Negotiation is to make the parties interest
compatible, so that both sides can win. That is, reach an
agreement that satisfies their need. The goals of the
parties are integrative. Negotiations are not mutually
exclusive. If one party achieves its goals, the other is not
precluded from achieving its goals as well. The
fundamental structure of integrative negotiation situation
is such that, it allows both sides to achieve their objective.
While Integrative Negotiation Strategies are preferable,
they are not always possible. Sometimes parties interests
really are opposed as when both sides want a larger share
of fixed resources.
CHARACTERISTIC OF INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION
It focus on commonalties rather than differences
It attempt to address needs and interests, not positions
It commit to meeting the needs of all involved parties
Exchange information and ideas
Invent options for mutual gain
Use objective criteria for standard of performance.
Past experience, based perceptions and truly distributive
aspects of bargaining makes it remarkable that integrative
agreements occur at all. But they do, largely because
negotiators work hard to overcome inhibiting factors and
search assertively for common ground. Those wishing to
achieve integrative results find that they must manage
both the contest and the process of negotiation in order to
gain the cooperation and commitment of all parties. Key
contextual factors include:
- Creating a free flow of information
- Attempting to understand the other negotiators real
need and objective
- Emphasizing the commonalties between the parties and
minimizing the differences
- Searching for solutions that meet the needs and
objectives of both sides.
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
KEY STEPS IN INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION PROCESSS
There are four major steps in the Integrative Negotiation
Process:
Identify and define the problem
Understand the problem and bring interests and needs
to the surface
Generate alternative solution to the problems
Evaluate those alternatives and select among them.
Increasing Value to Buyer
Claiming Value
Creating Value Pareto efficient frontier
Increasing Value to Seller
The first three steps of the Integrative Negotiation process
are important for Creating Value. While the fourth step o
the Integrative Negotiation Process, the evaluation and
selection of alternatives INVOLVE CLOUMING Value.
Claiming value involves many of the distributive bargaining
skills discussed earlier.
1. IDENTIFY AND DEFINE THE PROBLEM
The problem identification step is often the most difficult
one and it is even more challenging when several parties
are involved. Negotiator need to consider five aspects
when identifying and defining the problems.
Define the problem in a way that is mutually acceptable
to both sides.
State the problem with an eye toward practicality and
comprehensiveness
State the problem as a goal and identify the obstacles to
attaining this goal.
Depersonalize the problem
Separate the problem definition from the search for
solution.
2. UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM FULLY
Identify interest needs Many writers have stressed that a
3
key step in achieving an Integrative Agreement is the
ability of the parties to understand and satisfy each others
interest.2 Identifying interest is a critical step in the
Integrative Negotiation Process. Interests are the
underlying concerns, need or desires that motivate a
negotiator to take a particular position. However, in as
much as satisfaction may be difficult and understanding of
the underlying interest may permit them to invent
solutions that meet their interest. More so, several types
of interests may be at stake in a negotiation and that type
may be intrinsic (the parties value it in and of itself) or
instrumental (the parties value it because it helps them
derive other outcomes in the futures. 3
TYPES OF INTERESTS
Substantive Interests - related to the focal issues under
negotiation
Process Interests are related to the way a dispute is
settled
Relationship Interests indicate that one or both parties
value their relationship with each other and do not want
to take actions that will damage it.
Finally, Lax and Sebenius point out that the parties may
have interests in principles concerning what is fair, what is
right, what is acceptable, what is ethical, or what has been
done in the past and should be done in the future.
Some observation on Interests
(a) There is almost always more than one type of interest
underlying a negotiation
(b) Parties can have different types of interest at stake
(c) Interest often stem from deeply rooted human needs
or values
(d) Interest can change
(e) Surfacing Interests is not always easy or to ones best
advantage
(f) Focusing on interests can be harmful
(g) Generate alternative solutions.
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
The search for alternative is the creative phase of the
Integrative Negotiation. Once the parties have agreed on a
common definition of the problem and understood each
others interests, they need to generate a variety of
alternative solution. The objective is to create a list of
options or possible solution to the problem; evaluating
and selecting from among those options will be their task
in the final phase. Several techniques have been suggested
to help negotiators generate alternative solutions. These
techniques fall into two general categories. 4
i. Redefining the Problem or Problem Set:
This technique call for the parties to define their
underlying needs and develop alternatives to meet them.
Five different methods for achieving integrative
agreements have been proposed and are highlighted
below: 5
ii. Expand the pier:
This involves beginning negotiations with shortage of
resources, this is not possible for both parties to satisfy
their interests or obtain their objectives under current
condition. A simple solution is to add resources expand
the pie.
a. Logroll for logrolling to be successful, parties are
required to find more than one issues in conflict and to
have different priorities for those issues. 6 Logrolling is
frequently done by trial and error as part of the process of
experimenting with various packages of offers that will
satisfy everyone involved. However, logrolling may be
effective when the parties can combine two issues, but not
when the parties take turns in successive negotiation.
More so, logrolling is not only effective in inventing
options but also as a mechanism to combine options into
negotiated packages. Neale and Bazerman identify a
variety of approaches in addition to simply combining
several issues into a package. 7 Three of these in
particular, relate to the matters of outcome probabilities,
4
and timing in other words what is to happen, the
likelihood of it happening and when it happens.
b. Exploit differences in risk preference.
c. Exploit differences in time preferences
- Use nonspecific compensation A third way to generate
alternatives is to allow one person to obtain his objectives
and pay off the other person for accommodating his
interests. For non-specific compensation to work, the
person doing the compensating needs to know what is
valuable to the other person and how seriously she is
inconvenienced.
- Cut the costs for compliance: Through cost cutting, one
party achieves her objectives and the others costs are
minimized if she agrees to go along.
- Find a bridge solution: This involve a situation whereby
parties invent new options that mete all their respective
needs.
3. GENERATING ALTRNATIVE SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEM
AS GIVEN:
In addition to the techniques mentioned above, there are
several other approaches to generating alternative
solution. These approaches can be used by the negotiators
themselves or by a number of other parties. Several of
these approaches are commonly used in small groups.
These include:
Brainstorming: In brainstorming, small groups of people
work to generate as many possible solutions to the
problem as they can. Someone records; the solutions
without comment, as they are identified participants are
urged to be spontaneous, even impractical and not to
censor anyones ideas. The success of brainstorming
depends on the amount of intellectual stimulation that
occurs as different ideas are generated. The
(a) Avoid judging or evaluating solutions
(b) Separate the people from the problem
(c) Be exhaustive in the brainstorming process
(d) Ask outsider
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
However, the disadvantage of brainstorming is that it does
not solicit the ideas of those who are present at the
negotiation.
4. EVALUATE AND SELECT ALTERNATIVES:
The fourth stage in the Integrated Negotiation Process is
to evaluate the alternatives generated during the previous
phase and to select the best ones to implement. When the
challenge is a reasonable, simple one, the evaluation and
selection steps may be effectively combined into a singly
step. For those uncomfortable with the Integrative
Process, though we suggest a close adherence to a series
of distinct steps: definitions and standards, alternative,
evaluating and selection. The following guidelines should
be used in evaluating options and reaching a consensus.
Narrow the range of solution options
Evaluate solution on the basic of quality, and
acceptability
Agree to the criteria in advance of evaluating options
Be willing to justify personal preferences
Be alert to the influence of intangibles in selecting
options
Use subgroups to evaluate complex options
Take time out to cool off
Explore different ways to logroll.
FACTORS THAT FACILITATE SUCCESSFUL INTEGRATIVE
NEGOTIATION
We have stressed that successful Integrative Negotiation
can occur if the parties are predisposed to finding a
mutually acceptable joint solution. Many other factors
contribute to a predisposition toward problem solving and
a willingness to work together to find the best solution.
These factors are also the preconditions necessary for
more successful integrative negotiation. These factors
includes:-
- some common objective or goal
5
- faith in ones problem solving ability
- a belief in the validity of ones own position and the
others perspective
- The motivation and commitment to work together.
- Trust
- Clear and accurate communication
In conclusion, whether a negotiation is distributive or
integrative, negotiation should focus on substance which
will produce a mutually beneficial agreement at lower cost
and also focus on relations in which the parties maintain
civil relations of mutual recognition and respect and
improve their joint problem solving ability.
STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING
The distributive bargaining competitive, or win-lose,
bargaining is a situation where the goals of one party are
usually in fundamental and direct conflict with the goals of
the other party.
Resources are fixed and limited, and both parties want to
maximize their share. As a result, each party will use a set
of strategies to maximize his or her share of the outcomes
to be obtained. One important strategy is to guard
information carefully one party tries to give information
to the other party only when it provides a strategic
advantage. Meanwhile, it is highly desirable to get
information from the other party to improve negotiation
power. Distributive bargaining is basically a competition
over who is going to get the most of limited resources,
which is often money. Whether or not one of both parties
achieve their objectives will depend on the strategies and
tactics they employed.
For many, the strategies and tactics of distributives
bargaining are what negotiation is all about. Others are
repelled by distributive bargaining and would rather walk
away than negotiate this way they argue that distributive
bargaining is old fashioned, needlessly, confrontational
and destructive.
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
There are three reasons that every negotiator should be
familiar with Distributive Bargaining. First, negotiators face
some interdependent situations, that are distributive, and
to do well in them, they need to understand how they
work. Second, because many people use Distributive
Bargaining strategies and tactics almost exclusively, all
negotiators need to understand how to counter their
effects. Third, every negotiative situation has the potential
to require Distributive Bargaining skills when at the
claiming value stage 2. Understanding Distributive
Bargaining strategies and tactics is important and useful,
but negotiators need to recognize that these tactics can
also be counter productive and costly. Often they cause
negotiating parties to focus so much on their differences
that they ignore what they have in common 3. These
negative effects notwithstanding, Distributive Bargaining
strategies and tactics are quite useful when a negotiator
wants to maximize the value obtained in a single deal,
when the relationship with the other party is not
important, and when they are at the claiming value stage
of negotiation.
Before negotiation, both parties to a negotiation should
establish their starting, target and resistance point.
Starting points are often in the opening statements each
party makes (i.e. the sellers listing price and the buyers
offer). The target point is usually learned or inferred as
negotiations get under way. People typically give up the
margin between their starting points and target points as
they make concessions. The resistance point, the point
beyond which a person will not go and would rather break
off negotiations, is not known to the other party and
should be kept secret 4.
One party may not learn the others party resistance point
even after the end of a successful negotiation. After an
unsuccessful negotiation, one party may infer that the
others resistance point was near the last offer the other
was willing to consider before the negotiation ended.
6
The spread between the resistance points, called the
bargaining range, settlement range, or zone of potential
agreement, is particularly important. In this area, the
actual bargaining takes place, for anything outside these
points will be summarily rejected between one of the two
negotiators. When the buyers resistance point is above
the sellers, he is minimally willing to pay more than she is
minimally willing to sell.
However, because negotiators dont begin their
deliberation by talking about their resistance points, it is
often difficult to know whether a positive settlement
range exist until the negotiators get deep into the process.
It is worthy of note that, negotiations that started with
negative bargaining range are likely to stalemate. Target
points, resistance points and initial offers all play on
important role in Distributive Bargaining. Target point
influence both negotiators outcomes, opening offers play
on important role as a warning for the possible presence
of hardball tactics5.
In addition to opening bids, target points and resistance
points a fourth factor may enter the negotiations: and
alternative outcome that can be obtained by completing a
deal with someone else. In some negotiations, the parties
have only two fundamental choices: (a) reach a deal with
the other party, or (b) reach no settlement at all. In other
negotiations, however, one or both parties may have the
possibility of an alternative deal with another party.
An alternative point can be identical to the resistance
point, although the two do not have to be the same.
Alternative are important because they give negotiators
the power to walk from any negotiation when the
emerging deal is not very good. The number of realistic
alternatives that negotiators have will vary considerably
from one situation to another. In negotiations, where they
have many alternatives they can set their goals higher and
make fewer concessions. In negotiations where they have
no attractive alternatives, such as when dealing with a sole
supplier, they have much less bargaining power. Good
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
distributive bargainers identify their realistic alternatives
before starting discussions with the other party so that
they can properly gauge how firm to be in the negotiation.
Good bargainers 6 also try to improve their alternatives
while the negotiation is underway.
Negotiators need to ensure that they have a clear
understanding of their best alternative to a negotiated
agreement (BATNA) 7. Having a number of alternatives can
be useful, but it is really ones best alternative that will
influence the decision to close a deal or walk away.
Negotiators who have stronger BATNAs, that is, very
positive alternatives to a negotiated agreement, will have
more power throughout the negotiation and accordingly
should be able to achieve more of their goals.
In almost all negotiations, agreement is necessary on
several issues: the price, the closing date of sales
renovation, price of items forgone etc. The package of
issues for negotiation is refers to as the barraging mix.
Each item in the mix has its own starting target and
resistance points. Some items are of obvious importance
to both parties, others are important only to one party.
Negotiators need to understand what is important to them
and to the other party and they need to take these
priorities into account during the planning process 8.
Within the fundamental strategies of distributive
bargaining, there are four important tactical tasks,
concerned with targets, resistance points, and the cost of
terminating negotiations for a negotiator in a Distributive
Bargaining situation to consider:
Assess the other partys target, resistance point, and cost
of terminating negotiations
Manager the other partys impression of the negotiators
target, resistance point and cost of terminating
negotiation.
Modify the other partys perception of his or her own
target, resistance point and cost of terminating
negotiation and
7
 Manipulate the actual cost of delaying in terminating
negotiations.
POSITION TAKEN DURING NEGOTIATION
Effective distributive bargainers need to understand the
process of taking positions during bargaining, including the
importance of the opening offer and opening stance and
the role of making concessions throughout the negotiation
process. 9 At the beginning of negotiations, each party
takes a position. Typically, one party will then change his
or her position in response to information from the other
party or in response to the other partys behaviour.
Changes in position are usually accompanied by new
information concerning the others intentions, the value of
outcomes and likely zones for settlement. Negotiation is
interactive. It provides an opportunity for both sides to
communicate information about their positions that may
lead to change in those positions.
OPENING OFFER
When negotiation begins, the negotiator is faced with a
perplexing problem. What should the opening offer be?
Research by Adam Galinsky and Thomas Mussiveiler
suggest that making the first offer in a negotiation is
advantageous to the negotiator making the offer. 10 It
appears that first offer can anchor a negotiation especially
when information about alternative negotiation outcome
is not considered. Negotiator can dampen first offer
effect by the other negotiator, however, by concentrating
on their won target and focusing on the other negotiators
resistance point.
A second decision to be made at the outset of Distributive
Bargaining concerns the stance or attitude to adopt during
the negotiation. Will you be competitive (fighting to get
the best on every point) or moderate (willing to make
concessions and compromise?). Some negotiators take
belligerent stance, the other party may mirror the initial
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
stance, meeting belligerent stance with belligerence. It is
important for negotiators to think carefully about the
message that they wish to signal with their opening
because there is a tendency for negotiators to respond in
kind to distributive tactics in negotiation11. That is
negotiators tend to match distributive tactics from the
other party with their own distributive tactics, so
negotiators should make conscious decision about what
they are signaling to the other party with their opening
stance and subsequent concession.
An opening offer is usually met with a counter offers and
these two offers define the initial bargaining rang.
Sometime the other party will not counter offer but will
simply state that the first offer is unacceptable and ask the
opener to come back with a more reasonable set of
proposals. Note that it is not an option to escalate ones
opening offer that is, to set an offer further away form the
other partys target point that ones first offer. Opening
offers, opening stance, and initial concessions are
elements at the beginning of a negotiation that parties can
use to communicate how they intend to negotiate an
exaggerated opening offer, a determined opening stand,
and a very small opening concession signal a position of
firmness. Firmness can create a climate in which the other
party may decide that concessions are so meager that he
or she might as well capitulate and settle quickly rather
than drag things out. Paradoxically, firmness may actually
shorten negotiation12
However, negotiations can be flexible. There are several
good reasons for adopting a flexible position. 13 First,
when taking different stances throughout the negotiation,
one can learn about the other partys target and perceived
possibilities by observing how he or she respond to
different proposals. Negotiators may want to establish a
comparative rather than a competitive relationship,
hoping to get a better agreement. In addition, flexibility
keeps the negotiations proceeding; the more flexible one
seems the more the other party will believe that a
8
settlement is possible.
FINAL OFFERS
Eventually a negotiator wants to convey the message that
there is no further room for movement that the present
offer is the final one. A good negotiator will say, this is all
I can do or this is as far as I can go. Sometimes,
however, it is clear that a simple statement will not suffice;
an alternative is to use concessions to convey the point.
The final offer has to be large enough to be dramatic yet
not so large that it creates the suspicion that the
negotiator has been holding back and that there is more
available on other issues in the bargaining mix. 14
Closing the Deal
After negotiating for a period of time, and learning about
the other partys needs, positions, and perhaps resistance
point, the next challenge for a negotiator is to close the
agreement. Several tactics are available to negotiators for
closing a deal, 15 choosing the best tactic for a given
negotiation is as much as a matter of art as science. These
tactics are:
Provide Alternatives
Assume the Close
Split the Difference
Exploding Offers
Sweeteners
HARDBALL TACTICS
We now turn to a discussion of hardball tactics in
negotiation. Many popular books of negotiation discuss
using hardball negation tactics to beat the other party. 16
Such tactics are designed to pressure negotiators to do
things they would not otherwise do and their presence
usually disguises the users adherence to a decidedly
distributive bargaining approach. They also can backfire,
and there is evidence that every adversarial negotiator is
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
not effective negotiators. 17 Many negotiators consider
these tactics out-of-bounds for any negotiation situation.
The followings are the hardball tactics
Dealing with Typical Hardball Tactics
Ignore Them
Discuss Them
Respond in Kind
Co-opt the Other Party
Typical Hardball Tactic
Good Cop-Bad Cop
Lowball/Highball
Bogey
The Nibble
Chicken
Intimidation
Aggressive Behaviour
Snow Job
NEGOTIATION: strategy and planning
In simplest terms, negotiation is a discussion between two
or more disputants who are trying to work out a solution
to their problem. This interpersonal or inter-group process
can occur at a personal level, as well as at a corporate or
international (diplomatic) level. Negotiations typically take
place because the parties wish to create something new
that neither could do on his or her own, or to resolve a
problem or dispute between them1. The parties
acknowledge that there is some conflict of interest
between them and think they can use some form of
influence to get a better deal, rather than simply taking
what the other side will voluntarily give them. They prefer
to search for agreement rather than fight openly, give in,
or break off contact.
While they have interlocking goals that they cannot
accomplish independently, they usually do not want or
need exactly the same thing. This interdependence can be
either be win-lose or win-win in nature, and the type of
9
negotiation that is appropriate will vary accordingly. The
disputants will either attempt to force the other side to
comply with their demands, to modify the opposing
position and move toward compromise, or to invent a
solution that meets the objectives of all sides4. The nature
of their interdependence will have a major impact on the
nature of their relationship, the way negotiations are
conducted, and the outcomes of these negotiations.
Mutual adjustment is one of the key causes of the changes
that occur during a negotiation. Both parties know that
they can influence the other's outcomes and that the
other side can influence theirs5. The effective negotiator
attempts to understand how people will adjust and
readjust their positions during negotiations, based on what
the other party does and is expected to do. The parties
have to exchange information and make an effort to
influence each other. As negotiations evolve, each side
proposes changes to the other party's position and makes
changes to its own. This process of give-and-take and
making concessions is necessary if a settlement is to be
reached6. If one party makes several proposals that are
rejected, and the other party makes no alternate proposal,
the first party may break off negotiations. Parties typically
will not want to concede too much if they do not sense
that those with whom they are negotiating are willing to
compromise.
The parties must work toward a solution that takes into
account each person's requirements and hopefully
optimizes the outcomes for both. As they try to find their
way toward agreement, the parties focus on interests,
issues, and positions, and use cooperative and/or
competitive processes to come to an agreement.
NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES
Negotiation success can be measured in different ways.
Focusing on substance, negotiations may be called
successful when they produce a mutually beneficial
agreement at lower cost that an alternative forum, and
when that agreement is implemented. Focusing on
process, a successful negotiation would be one which was
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
fair, efficient in terms of time and money, involved in all
the relevant stakeholders, consistent with applicable
regulations, and did not establish limiting precedents for
third-parties. Focusing on relations, successful
negotiations are those in which the parties maintain civil
relations of mutual recognition and respect, and improve
their joint problem-solving abilities. Generally the
substantive measure tends to dominate.
One key negotiating strategy is to focus on interests rather
than positions. A party's interests are the reasons they
have for holding a particular position on an issue.
Negotiations based on positions tend to devolve into
contests of will. They are less successful by any measure.
Incompatible positions may be backed by compatible
interests, and so negotiating on interests is more likely to
produce fair, mutually beneficial outcomes without
generating added hostility. In addition to separating
interests from positions, it is helpful to generate a wide
range of possible solutions before trying to come to a
decision. It is also helpful for the parties to agree on the
criteria by which possible solutions will be evaluated
before actually setting down to evaluate the proposals.
Negotiating strategies may be integrative (win-win) or
distributional (zero-sum). Negotiating on interests is often
integrative. The goal is to make the parties' interests
compatible, so that both sides can win that is, reach an
agreement that satisfies their needs. While integrative
negotiation strategies are preferable, they are not always
possible. Sometimes parties' interests really are opposed,
as when both sides want a larger share of a fixed resource.
In these cases distributional negotiations, which seek to
distribute the costs and benefits fairly, are necessary.
Sometimes disputes which appear to be zero-sum can be
reframed so that an integrative approach is possible. One
way to do this is to find creative ways to increase or use
the apparently "fixed" resource. Another way is to
reinterpret the parties' interests to make them
compatible, or to find more basic interests which are
compatible.
10
APPROACHES TO NEGOTIATION
Fisher,R.,Ury,W.,Patton,B. make several overlapping
distinctions about approaches to negotiation. They
distinguish between positional bargaining, which is
competitive, and interest-based bargaining or principled
negotiation, which is primarily cooperative. But they also
make the distinction between soft, hard, and principled
negotiation, the latter of which is neither soft, nor hard,
but based on cooperative principles which look out for
oneself as well as one's opponent9.
However distinctions were also made
between competitive and cooperative approaches. The
most important factors that determine whether an
individual will approach a conflict cooperatively or
competitively are the nature of the dispute and the goals
each side seeks to achieve. Often the two sides' goals are
linked together, or interdependent. The parties'
interaction will be shaped by whether this
interdependence is positive or negative10.
Goals with positive interdependence are tied together in
such a way that the chance of one side attaining its' goal is
increased by the other side's attaining its goal. Positively
interdependent goals normally result in cooperative
approaches to negotiation, because any participant can
"attain his goal if, and only if, the others with whom he is
linked can attain their goals.
On the other hand, negative interdependence means the
chance of one side attaining its goal is decreased by the
other's success. Negatively interdependent goals force
competitive situations, because the only way for one side
to achieve its goals and "win" is for the other side to
"lose."
Fisher,R.,Ury.,W.,Patton,B.also argue that almost any
dispute can be resolved with interest-based bargaining
(i.e., a cooperative approach), other theorists believe the
two approaches should be used together. Some for
example, argue that negotiations typically involve
"creating" and "claiming" value. First, the negotiators work
cooperatively to create value (that is, "enlarge the pie,")
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
but then they must use competitive processes to claim
value (that is, "divide up the pie")12.
However, a tension exists between creating and claiming
value. This is because the competitive strategies used to
claim value tend to undermine cooperation, while a
cooperative approach makes one vulnerable to
competitive bargaining tactics. The tension that exists
between cooperation and competition in negotiation is
known as "The Negotiator's Dilemma
If both sides cooperate, they will both have good
outcomes.
If one cooperates and the other competes, the co-
operator will get a terrible outcome and the competitor
will get a great outcome.
If both compete, they will both have mediocre outcomes.
In the face of uncertainty about what strategy the other
side will adopt, each side's best choice is to compete.
However, if they both compete, both sides end up worse
off.
In real life, parties can communicate and commit
themselves to a cooperative approach. They can also
adopt norms of fair and cooperative behaviour and focus
on their future relationship. This fosters a cooperative
approach between both parties and helps them to find
joint gains.
From the above discussion, we are able to understand that
effective strategy and planning are the most important
critical factors for achieving negotiation objective.
However, proper attention should be directed at
addressing basic causes of failure in strategic and
systematic in negotiation. In the long run, with effective
planning, and target setting, most negotiators can and will
achieve their objective.
11
 UNIT II the same dispute and perceive it in very different ways as
a result of their background, professional training or past
PERCEPTION ,COGNITION,AND EMOTION experiences3.Aframe is a way of labelling these different
individual interpretations of the situation.
Perception, cognition and emotion are the building blocks Types of frames;
of all social encounters, including negotiation, in the sense Substantive
that our social actions are guided by how we perceive and Outcome
analyze the other party, the situation, and our interests Aspiration
and positions. A working knowledge of how humans Process
perceive and process information is important to Identity
understand why people behave the way they do during Characterization
negotiations. Lossgainlow
Perception can be defined as the process by which
individuals connect to their environment. The process of COGNITIVE BIASES IN NEGOTIATION
ascribing meaning to messages and events is strongly
influenced by the perceivers current state of mind, role, A cognitive bias in negotiation is the systematic
and comprehension of earlier communications.1 Other information processing errors that negotiators make and
parties perceptions, the environment, and the perceivers that may compromise negotiation performance. Thus,
disposition are also important influence on ones ability to rather than being perfect processers of information, it is
interpret with accuracy what the other party is saying and clear that negotiators have the tendency to make
meaning. systematic errors when they process information.4 These
errors that tend to impede negotiation performance
PERCEPTION DISTORTION include:
1. Irrational escalation of commitment
In any given negotiation, the perceivers own needs, 2. Mythical fixed-pie beliefs
desire, motivations, and personal experiences may create 3. Anchoring and adjustment
a predisposition about the other party. This is cause for 4. Isssue framing and risk
concern when it leads to biases and errors in perception 5. Availability of information
and subsequent communication. However, there are four 6. The winners curse
types of perception errors; 7. Overconfidence
Stereotyping 8. The laws of small numbers
Hallo effects 9. Self-serving biases
Selective perception 10. Endowment effect
And, projection. 11. Ignoring others cognitions
FRAMING 12. Reactive devaluation
A key issue in perception and negotiation is framing. A
frame is the subjective mechanism through which people MANAGING MISPERCEPTIONS AND COGNITIVE BIASES IN
evaluate and make sense out of situation, leading them to NEGOTIATION
pursue or avoid subsequent actions.2 Frames are Misrepresentations and cognitive biases typically arise out
important in negotiation because people can encounter of conscious awareness as negotiators gather and process

Prof. Amit Kumar

amit040985@gmail.com 12
FIT Group of Institutions
information. The question of how best to manage
perception and cognitive bias is a difficult one. However,
the following solutions to these systematic distortions can
be observed:
Awareness of the occurrences
Problem definition and problem evaluation
Careful discussion of the issue and preferences of both
negotiators
Negotiators awareness of the negative aspects of these
distortions
Discuss these problems in structured manner within team
and with their counterparts.
COMMUNICATION
Reduced to its essence, negotiation is a form of
interpersonal communication. Communication processes,
both verbal and nonverbal, are critical to achieving goals
and to resolve conflicts. However, one of the fundamental
questions that researchers in communication and
negotiation have examined is, what is communicated
during negotiation? The researchers found that 70% of the
verbal tactics that buyers and sellers used during
negotiation were integrative. In addition, buyers and
sellers tend to behave reciprocally-when one party use an
integrative tactic, the other tended to respond with
integrative tactic.
Most of the communication during negotiation is not
about negotiator preferences1.although the blend of
distributive and integrative content varies as a function of
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
the issue being discussed, it is also clear that the content
of communication is only partly responsible for
negotiation outcomes2.
FIVE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF COMMUNICATION
Offer, counteroffer, and motives.
Information about alternatives.
Information about outcomes.
Social account.
Communication process.
METHOD OF COMMUNICATION IN NEGOTIATION
While it may seem obvious that how negotiators
communicate is as important as what they have to say,
research has examined different aspects of how people
communicate. The different methods of communication
during negotiation are as follows:
Use of language.
Use of nonverbal communication.
Make eye contact.
Adjust body position.
Nonverbally encourage or discourage what other says.
SELECTION OF A COMMUNICATION CHANNEL
Communication is experienced differently when it occur
through different channels. We may think of negotiation
as typically occurring face-to-face-an assumption
reinforced by the common metaphor of the negotiation
table but the reality is that people negotiate through a
variety of communication media: over the phone, in
writing, and increasingly through electronic channels such
as e-mail, instant messaging, and teleconferencings
systems. The use of network-mediated information
technologies in negotiation is sometimes referred to as
virtual negotiations.
13
HOW TO IMPROVE COMMUNICATION IN NEGOTIATION argument for one particular position in debate lead to a
blindness of involvement, or a self-reinforcement cycle
Given then ways that communication can be disrupted and of argumentation that prohibits negotiators from
distorted, we can only marvel at the extent to which recognizing the possible compatibility between their own
negotiators can actually understand each other. Failures position and that of the other party.
and distortions in perception, cognition,and
communication are the paramount contributors to SPECIAL COMMUNICATION CONSIDERATIONS AT THE
breakdowns and failures in negotiation. Reseach CLOOSE OF NEGOTIATIONS
consistently demonstrates that even those parties whose
goals are compatible or integrated may fail to reach Avoid fatal mistakes.
agreement or reach suboptimal agreements because of Achieving closure.
the misperception of the other party or because of Having carefully examined the importance of
breakdown in the communication process. communication in negotiation, it is then highly imperative
Three main techniques are available for improving that parties, during negotiation manage communication
communication in negotiation: effectively in order to avoid failure to reach an agreement
1.The use of questions-questions are essential elements in and breakdown in negotiation
negotiations for securing information; asking good
BEST PRACTICES: NEGOTIATING
questions enables negotiators to secure a great deal of 1. Preparation
information about the other partys position, supporting 2. Structure diagnosis
3. Batna
arguments; and needs. Questions can be divided into two 4. Be willing to walk
basic categories: those that are manageable and those 5. Master negotiation paradoxes
6. Intangibles
that are unmanageable and cause difficulty3.manageable 7. Coalitions
questions cause attention or prepare the other persons 8. Reputation
9. Relativity
thinking for further questions, get information, and 10. Life-long learning
generate thought. While unmanageable questions cause 1. Be prepared
Understand and articulate your goals and
difficulties, give information, and bring the discussion to a
interests
false conclusion. Set high but achievable aspirations for
2. Another technique is listening. There are three major negotiation
1. Diagnose the fundamental structure of the negotiation
forms of listening: Make conscious decisions about the nature of
Passive listening-involves receiving the message while the
negotiation: is it a distributive or integrative
providing no feedback to the sender about the accuracy or negotiation or blend of the two
completeness of reception. Choose strategies and tactics accordingly
1. Identify and work the BATNA
Acknowledgement-is the second form of listening, slightly Be vigilant about the BATNA
more active than the passive listening. When Be aware of the other negotiators BATNA
4. Be willing to walk away
acknowledging, receiver occasionally nod their heads,
Strong negotiators are willing to walk away
maintain eye contact, or interject responses. when no
agreement is better than a poor agreement
Active listening is the third form. When receiver is actively
Have a clear walk away point in mind where
listening, they restate or paraphrase the senders message you will
in their own language4. halt the negotiation
5. Master the key paradoxes of negotiation
3.Role reversal this occur when there is continual Claiming value versus creating value
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com 14
FIT Group of Institutions
 Sticking by your principles versus being So it is not necessarily your ideal outcome--unless your
resilient to
ideal outcome is something you can get without the
the flow
Sticking with the strategy versus opportunistic cooperation of the other person. It is the best you can do
pursuit WITHOUT THEM.
of new options
Facing the dilemma of honesty: honest and BATNAs are critical to negotiation because you cannot
open
make a wise decision about whether to accept a
versus closed and opaque
Facing the dilemma of trust: trust versus negotiated agreement unless you know what your
distrust alternatives are. If you are offered a used car for $7,500,
6. Remember the intangibles but there's an even better one at another dealer for
see what is not there
$6,500--the $6,500 car is your BATNA. Another term for
ask questions
take an observer or listener with you to the the same thing is your "walk away point." If the seller
negotiation doesn't drop her price below $6,500, you will WALK AWAY
7. Actively manage coalitions and buy the other car.
coalitions against you
coalitions that support you
undefined coalitions that may materialize for Your BATNA "is the only standard which can protect you
or both from accepting terms that are too unfavorable and
against you from rejecting terms it would be in your interest to
8. Savor and protect your reputation accept."[2] In the simplest terms, if the proposed
start negotiation with a positive reputation
agreement is better than your BATNA, then you should
shape your reputation by acting in a consistent
and accept it. If the agreement is not better than your BATNA,
fair manner then you should reopen negotiations. If you cannot
9. Remember that rationality and fairness are improve the agreement, then you should at least consider
relative withdrawing from the negotiations and pursuing your
question your perceptions of fairness and
ground alternative (though the relational costs of doing that must
them in clear principles be considered as well).
find external benchmarks of fair outcomes Having a good BATNA increases your negotiating power. If
engage in dialogue to reach consensus on you know you have a good alternative, you do not need to
fairness
concede as much, because you don't care as much if you
10. Continue to learn from your experience
practice the art and science of negotiation get a deal. You can also push the other side harder. If
analyze each negotiation your options are slim or non existent, the other person can
Plan a personal reflection time after each negotiation make increasing demands, and you'll likely decide to
Periodically take a lesson from a trainer or a coach
accept them--because you don't have a better option, no
Keep a personal diary on strengths and weaknesses and
develop a plan to work on weaknesses matter how unattractive the one on the table is becoming.
Therefore, it is important to improve your BATNA
whenever possible. If you have a strong one, it is worth
BEST ALTERNATIVE TO A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT revealing it to your opponent. If you have a weak one,
however, it is better to keep that detail hidden.
(BATNA)
Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess have adapted the concept
What BATNAs Are....... of BATNA slightly to emphasize what they call "EATNAs"--
BATNA is a term coined by Roger Fisher and William Ury in estimated alternatives to a negotiated agreement" instead
their 1981 bestseller, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Without of "best alternatives." Even when disputants do not have
Giving In.[1] It stands for "Best ALTERNATIVE TO a good options outside of negotiations, they often think they
negotiated agreement." Said another way, it is the best do. (For example, both sides may think that they can
you can do if the other person refuses to negotiate with prevail in a court or military struggle, even when one side
you--if they tell you to "go jump in a lake!" or "Get lost!" is clearly weaker, or when the relative strengths are so

Prof. Amit Kumar

amit040985@gmail.com 15
FIT Group of Institutions
balanced that the outcome is very uncertain.) Yet,
perceptions are all that matter when it comes to deciding
whether or not to accept an agreement. If a disputant
thinks that he or she has a better option, she will, very
often, pursue that option, even if it is not as good as she
thinks it is.
BATNA and EATNAs also affect what William Zartman and
may others have called "ripeness," the time at which a
dispute is ready or "ripe" for settlement.[3] When parties
have similar ideas or "congruent images" about what
BATNAs exist, then the negotiation is ripe for reaching
agreement. Having congruent BATNA images means that
both parties have similar views of how a dispute will turn
out if they do not agree, but rather pursue their other
rights-based or power-based options. In this situation, it is
often smarter for them to negotiate an agreement without
continuing the disputing process, thus saving the
transaction costs. This is what happens when disputing
parties who are involved in a lawsuit settle out of court,
(which happens in the U.S. about 90 percent of the time).
The reason the parties settle is that their lawyers have
come to an understanding of the strength of each sides'
case and how likely each is to prevail in court. They then
can "cut to the chase," and get to the same result much
more easily, more quickly, and less expensively through
negotiation.
On the other hand, disputants may hold "dissimilar
images" about what BATNAs exist, which can lead to a
stalemate or even to intractability. For example, both sides
may think they can win a dispute if they decide to pursue it
in court or through force. If both sides' BATNAs tell them
they can pursue the conflict and win, the likely result is
a power contest. If one side's BATNA is indeed much
better than the other's, the side with the better BATNA is
likely to prevail. If the BATNAs are about equal, however,
the outcome is much less certain. If the conflict is costly
enough, eventually the parties may come to realize that
their BATNAs were not as good as they thought they were.
Then the dispute will again be "ripe" for negotiation.
The allure of the EATNA often leads to last-minute
breakdowns in negotiations, particularly when many
parties are involved. Disputants can negotiate for months
or even years, finally developing an agreement that they
think is acceptable to all. But then at the end, all the
parties must take a hard look at the final outcome and
decide, "is this better than all of my alternatives?" Only if
all the parties say "yes," can the agreement be finalized. If
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
just one party changes his or her mind, the agreement may
well break down. Thus, knowing one's own and one's
opponents' BATNAs and EATNAs is critical to successful
negotiation
Determining Your BATNA
BATNAs are not always readily apparent. Fisher and Ury
outline a simple process for determining your BATNA:
1. develop a list of actions you might conceivably
take if no agreement is reached;
2. improve some of the more promising ideas and
convert them into practical options; and
3. select, tentatively, the one option that seems
best.[4]
BATNAs may be determined for any negotiation situation,
whether it be a relatively simple task such as finding a job
or a complex problem such as a heated environmental
conflict or a protracted ethnic conflict.
Fisher and Ury offer a job search as a basic example of how
to determine a BATNA. If you do not receive an attractive
job offer by the end of the month from Company X, what
will you do? Inventing options is the first step to
determining your BATNA. Should you take a different job?
Look in another city? Go back to school? If the offer you
are waiting for is in New York, but you had also considered
Denver, then try to turn that other interest into a job offer
there, too. With a job offer on the table in Denver, you will
be better equipped to assess the New York offer when it is
made. Lastly, you must choose your best alternative
option in case you do not reach an agreement with the
New York company. Which of your realistic options would
you really want to pursue if you do not get the job offer in
New York?
More complex situations require the consideration of a
broader range of factors and possibilities. For example, a
community discovers that its water is being polluted by
the discharges of a nearby factory. Community leaders first
attempt to negotiate a cleanup plan with the company,
but the business refuses to voluntarily agree on a plan of
action that the community is satisfied with. In such a case,
what are the community's options for trying to resolve this
situation?
They could possibly sue the business based on
stipulations of the Clean Water Act.
They could contact the Environmental Protection
Agency and see what sort of authority that
agency has over such a situation.
16
 They could lobby the state legislature to develop
and implement more stringent regulations on
polluting factories.
The community could wage a public education
campaign and inform citizens of the problem.
Such education could lead voters to support more
environmentally-minded candidates in the future
who would support new laws to correct problems
like this one. It might also put enough public
pressure on the company that it would change its
mind and clean up voluntarily.
In weighing these various alternatives to see which is
"best," the community members must consider a variety
of factors.
Which is most affordable and feasible?
Which will have the most impact in the shortest
amount of time?
If they succeed in closing down the plant, how
many people will lose their jobs?
These types of questions must be answered for each
alternative before a BATNA can be determined in a
complex environmental dispute such as this one.
BATNAs and the Other Side
At the same time you are determining your BATNA, you
should also consider the alternatives available to the other
side. Sometimes they may be overly optimistic about what
their options are. The more you can learn about their
options, the better prepared you will be for negotiation.
You will be able to develop a more realistic view of what
the outcomes may be and what offers are reasonable.
There are also a few things to keep in mind about
revealing your BATNA to your adversary. Although Fisher
and Ury do not advise secrecy in their discussions of
BATNAs, according to McCarthy, "one should not reveal
one's BATNA unless it is better than the other side thinks it
is."[5] But since you may not know what the other side
thinks, you could reveal more than you should. If your
BATNA turns out to be worse than the opponent thinks it
is. Then revealing it will weaken your stance.
BATNAs and the Role of Third Parties
Third parties can help disputants accurately assess their
BATNAs through reality testing and costing. In reality
testing, the third party helps clarify and ground each
disputing party's alternatives to agreement. S/he may do
this by asking hard questions about the asserted BATNA:
"How could you do that? What would the outcome be?
What would the other side do? How do you know?" Or the
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
third party may simply insert new information into the
discussion...illustrating that one side's assessment of its
BATNA is likely incorrect. Costing is a more general
approach to the same process...it is a systematic effort to
determine the costs and benefits of all options. In so
doing, parties will come to understand all their
alternatives. If this is done together and the parties agree
on the assessment, this provides a strong basis upon which
to come up with a negotiated solution that is better than
both sides' alternatives. But if the sides cannot come to
such an agreement, then negotiations will break down,
and both parties will pursue their BATNA instead of a
negotiated outcome.
C ASE STUDY- ROLE NEGOTIATION AT BOKARO STEEL
PLANT
SUMMARY
The case study is all about the Role Negotiation between
The Bokaro Steel Plant. Their main objectives of Bokaro
plant is to understand each other role in the area of
employees service, eliminating hardship, treating
employees as human beings and image building of
departments along with an improvement in the service
rendered to the employees. Almost 32 persons were
participated putting their effort for 2 days working in the
particular exercise continuously for 11 hour. The time
schedule was fixed for microlab, image building, image
sharing and clarification ,empathy building (positive
image)expectation in home group, exchange of
expectation and clarification, discussion in home groups,
consolidation by a joint team and listing joint
recommendations, signing of agreement and preparation
for dialogue with the top management.
Role negotiation has three phases with top management
and the top purposes of these exercise was to give the
judgment on and lead to mutual understanding by keeping
positive image in mind. The starting of the microlab
exercise with the executive of different departments was
very interesting ,as everyone shared their pleasant and
unpleasant experiences and also came out with their own
17
strength ,weakness and perception about their own and
other department including other perception about their
department. The group formed for this particular exercise
shared their positive image, strength and building their
empathy.
The image drawn of executive department related to
empathy building exercise was helpful, service oriented,
humane, effective communicators, change agents,
accountable, adaptable, easily accessible, more involved in
production by creating conducive environment and
actively solving problem. And the image drawn by finance
was: poor record keeping, good team work, problem
solving attitude, projecting good image at the cost of
other, wrong pay fixation with subsequent corrigendum,
partiality, shifting of blame, bureaucratic approach, ad hoc
decision and for all problem blame others.
The image or personals guess by finance EDP related to
empathy building was:
wrong pay fixation with subsequent corrigendum, poor
record keeping, inconsistency in application of rules,
shifting of blame, blamed personnel department for all
problems, bureaucratic approach, projecting good image
at cost of others, good team work and problem solving
attitude. After generating the image of empathy by
personnel department. They started to draw out the image
of finance and EDP and their individual image drawn out
was timely, punctual, effective, sincere, honest,
cooperative, open, communicative, understanding and
helping.
The personnel image drawn was :
The prompt in payment of certain
item, good finance, management and effective cost
control, rule oriented, lacking human touch, less
accessible, low initiative on communication with
employees and other department, lack of problem solving
approach, more centralized functioning, no involvement in
plant problem, subordinate oriented approach and lack of
coordination with departments isolated, this shows the
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
personnel image drawn which points out the negative part
of finance and EDP department.
The positive image or strength generated was:
Effective cost control, strong
budgetary, promptness in making payment, good team
spirit, good system of timely job rotation, team spirit,
tactful, human approach, motivating force, cooperative.
After deriving the positive image and empathy the home
group was formed to reduce the negative image and
increase the positive image to make home group more
effective in their role performance. The ideas and view
where exchanged and clarification were sought. The home
group of executives department continued with
Time schedules prescribed for various
payments
Enquiry counters as the shop floor.
Prompt response to final settlement
Prompt payment of travel and
conveyance allowance.
Disbursement of salary and PF at shop
floor
Time keeping system
Preparation of computerized statement
of income tax ,PF absenteeism rate
,leave ledger and final settlement,
Issuing order regarding appointment
,promotion ,transfer and separation
Certifying claims of employees regarding
LTC/LLTC
Certifying claims for payment of
PF/gratuity/leave salary etc
Maintaining good personal relation and
coordination
Working of final settlement cell
No change was made in this because they were the
positive image which did not require any type of changes.
18
The negotiations were conducted on acceptance of each
other expectations. In second round of role negotiation
one team consolidated and integrated the points on which
there was unanimous agreement and which could be
implemented without any external help with both the
group. The group agreed to implement the final contract
and consolidated points which were not within their
competence and needed the approval and support of the
top management.
Payment of medical advances
Final settlement through signal window clearance
system
Decentralization of the pay account section
Decentralization of the OD section
The recommendation was discussed with the top
management regarding all points and the
recommendation was approved. The top team gave their
full support in the implementation of the
recommendation. The task force was constituted with five
executes to ensure implementing within 15 days and
decided to review the implementation after 2 months.
PROBLEMS
Some of the problems arise in the role negotiation at
Bokaro steel plants are as follows:
The 32 persons participated in the role
negotiation, they had to work 11 hours, spread
over 2 days for obtaining the objectives.
Image generated through empathy building
exercise was poor record keeping.
The personnel guess of image by finance through
empathy building exercise was wrong pay fixation
with subsequent corrigendum.
There was problem solving attitude
Partiality was done in payment
Shifting of blame in the field of finance
No one accepts their mistake, everyone blames
The efforts done by the executives from different
each other for all the problems that had or will
departments are as follows:
arise.
The personnel guess of image by finance in
empathy building was blaming personnel
department for all the problem.
Projecting good image at the cost of other
Inconsistency in application of rules
Lacking in human touch
Less accessible because of distance location
Low initiative on communication with employees
and other department.
Lack of problem solving approach
Inefficient
More centralized functioning
No involvement in plant problem
Lack of co-ordination with the department,
isolated.
Time for giving pay clearance in final settlement
cases
Insisting on individual order
Arising for pay slips in support of claims
Discrimination in making payment
Late arrival of the payment staff at payment
counters
Raising superficial objection regarding eligibility
for payment in compensation cases.
Delay in enquiry proceedings regarding
suspended employees from their payment.
Delay in replying representation
Delay in sending DA rate orders
Sending incomplete claims files for PF/gratuity
payment
Delay in processing cases for final settlement
No availability of sufficient copies for ensuring
prompt action
EFFORTS

Prof. Amit Kumar

amit040985@gmail.com 19
FIT Group of Institutions
 They put efforts in giving the employees error They insisted to help the top management to
free service implement the points as the points were not
They tried to eliminate hardships within their competence and needed the approval
Treating employees as human beings and support of the top management.

Image building of department The final contracts was done and asked to accept

They tried to improve in the service rendered by those points

them to employees The recommendation was derived after long

They exchanged their Image and seek discussion and was asked to accept to top

clarification. management

Empathy building The rules and procedures was agreed to simplify

Discussion done in home group and reduced delay and hardship to the

Signing of agreement and preparation for employees.

dialogue.
Working continuously for 2 days(11 hours). SUGGESTION

Sharing pleasant and unpleasant experiences with Some of the steps to be taken to reduce these problem

each others to know their strength and weakness. like:

Trying to find out the individual perception about Improve the record keeping style

their department. Good team work to be formed among employees

More involvement in production. Problem solving attitude should not be shown

Trying to make their home group role eefective Wrong pay fixation with subsequent corrigendum

Preparing list for the reduction of negative image should be reduced

and developing/increasing positive image. Partiality done with employees should be stopped

Started reducing negative images like: and reduced immediately

Time for giving pay clearance in final Avoid shifting of blames on others.

settlement cases. Stop blaming others for all problem instead of

Insisting on individual orders looking for the solution.

Asking for pay slips in support of claims. Giving reward to one who has worked hard and

Discrimination in making payments deserves the reward

Late arrivals of the payment staff at Giving more time to employees, spending more
payment counters time with them.

Delay in replying representations Should be always ready with the solution

Delay in sending da rate orders. Both centralized and decentralized functioning
Sending incomplete claims files for should be done
PF/gratuity payments. Coordination should be made with every
Delay in processing cases for final department.
settlement.
Implementation was done for the unanimous
agreement without any external help

Prof. Amit Kumar

amit040985@gmail.com 20
FIT Group of Institutions
 UNIT III
INTERNATIONAL AND CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION
For many people and organization, international
negotiation has become a norm rather than an exotic
activity that only occasionally occurs. In the last 20 years,
the frequency of international negotiation has increased
rapidly bolstering the interests in international
communication. However, there has been numerous
inputs, from both academic and practitioner perspectives
about the complexities of negotiation across borders, be it
with a person from different country, culture, or region.
Although the term culture has many possible definitions,
we will use it to refer to the shared values and beliefs of a
group of people. Country can have more than one culture,
and culture can span national borders. As we have
examined earlier, negotiation is a social process that is
embedded in a much lager context. This context increases
in complexity when more than one culture or country is
involved, making international negotiation a highly
complicated process.
Phatak and Habib suggest that two overall contexts have
an influence on international negotiations:
THE ENVIRONMENT CONTEXTS:
Salacuse identified six factors in the environmental context
that make international negotiations more challenging
than domestic negotiations: and these include the
following;
Political and legal pluralism.
International economics.
Foreign government and bureaucracies.
Instability.
Ideology.
Culture.
Phatak and Habib have suggested additional factor which
is:
External stakeholders.
IMMEDIATE COTEXTS:
At many points in our discussions, we have discussed
aspects of negotiation that relate to immediate contexts
factors, but without considering their international
implications, at this junction we will list the concepts from
the Phatak and Habib model of international negotiation.
And the immediate contexts are:
Relative bargaining power.
Level of conflict.
Relationship between negotiators.
Desire outcomes.
Immediate stakeholders.
CONCEPTUALIZING CULTURE AND NEGOTIATION.
Prof. Amit Kumar
amit040985@gmail.com
FIT Group of Institutions
The most frequently studied aspect of international
negotiation is culture and the amount of research on the
effects of culture n negotiation has increased substantially
in the last 20 years. There are many different meanings of
the concept of culture, but all definition share two aspects.
First, culture is a group-level phenomenon. That means
that a defined group of people shares beliefs, values, and
behavioural expectations. The second common element of
culture is that cultural beliefs, values, and behavioural
expectations are learned and passed on to new members
of the group.
It is also important to remember that negotiation
outcomes, both domestically and internationally, are
determined by several different factors. While cultural
differences are clearly important, negotiators must guard
against assigning too much responsibility to cultural
factors. Dialdin, Brett, Okumura, and Lytle have labelled
the tendency to overlook the importance of the situational
factors in favour of cultural explanations the cultural
attribution error. It is important to recognize that even
though culture describes group-level characteristics, it
doesnt mean that every member of a culture will share
those characteristics equally. In fact, there is likely to be a
wide of a variety of behavioural differences within cultures
as there is between cultures. Although knowledge of the
other partys culture may provide an initial clue about
what to expect at the bargaining table, negotiators need to
be open to adjusting their view very quickly as new
information is gathered.
The two important ways that culture has been
conceptualized are:
Culture as shared value
And, culture as dialectic.
THE INFLUENCE OF CULTURE ON NEGOTIATION:
Managerial perspectives
Cultural differences have been suggested to influence
negotiation in several ways. Now lets examine different
ways that culture can influence negotiation.
Definition of negotiation: the fundamental definition of
negotiation, what is negotiable, and what occurs when we
negotiate can differ greatly across cultures.(i.e.) American
way and the Japanese ways of viewing negotiations.
Negotiation opportunity: culture influences the way
negotiators perceive an opportunity as distributive versus
integrative. Negotiators in North America are predisposed
to perceive negotiation as being fundamentally
distributive. But this is not the case outside North
America.
Selection of negotiators: The criterion used to select who
will participate in a negotiation is different across cultures.
These criteria can include such subject matter as age,
seniority, gender, status, etc.
Protocol: cultures differ in the degree to which protocol, or
the formality of the relations between the two negotiating
parties, is important.
Communication: cultures influence how people
21
communicate; both verbally and nonverbally. There are
also differences in body language across cultures.
Time sensitivity: cultures largely determine what time
means and how it affects negotiations. For example,
comparing North American time consciousness with that
of China or Latin Americans.
Risk propensity: Cultures vary in the extent to which they
are willing to take risks. Some cultures tend to produce
bureaucratic, conservative decision makers who want a
great deal of information before making decisions.
Groups versus individuals: cultures differ according to
whether they emphasize the individual or the group.eg the
United State is very much an individual-oriented culture.
Nature of agreements: culture also has an important effect
both on concluding agreements and on what form the
negotiated agreement takes.
Emotionalism: culture appears to influence the extent to
which negotiators display emotions. These emotions may
be use as tactics, or may be a natural response to positive
and negative circumstances during negotiation.
Adapt to the other negotiators approach (unilateral
strategy)
Coordinate adjustment (joint strategy)
HIGH FAMILIARITY:
Embrace the other negotiators approach (unilateral
strategy)
Improvise an approach (joint strategy)
Effect symphony (joint strategy)
Lastly, there has been considerate research on the effects
of culture on negotiation in the last decade. Findings
suggest that culture has important effects on several
aspects of negotiations, including planning, the
negotiation process, information exchange, negotiation
cognition, and negotiator perception of ethical
Behaviour.

THEN INFLUENCE OF CULTURE ON NEGOTIATION:

UNIT IV
Research perspectives
A conceptual model of where culture may influence
negotiation has been developed by different scholars, for COUNSELLING
example Jeanne Brett, suggested that culture will In general the counseling is to help individuals to
influence, setting of priorities, and strategies, the overcome many of their problems. It involves two factors.
identification of the potential for integrative agreement, TERMS INVOLVED IN COUNSELING
and the pattern of interaction between negotiators. 1. Counselor
Researchers also explore how intracultural and cross 2. counselee
cultural factors will influence the outcome of an DEFINITION
agreement. It has also been suggested that overall Acc.to Smith(1955): A process in which the counselor
negotiation process and outcome will be influenced by assists the counselee to make the interpretations of facts
cultures. related to choice, plan or adjustments which he need to
make.
CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE NEGOTIATING STRATEGIES Acc.to Perez(1965): The counseling is an interactive
process conjoining the counselor who needs assistance
Stephen Weiss has proposed a useful way of thinking and the counselor who is trained and educated to give the
about the options we have when negotiating with assistance.
someone from another culture. Weiss observes that FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO THE EMERGENCE OF
negotiators may choose from among up to eight COUNSELING
different culturally responsive strategies. These strategies 1. Technological factors
may be used individually or sequentially, and the 2. Psychological factors
strategies can be switched as the negotiation progresses. 3. Educational factors
Weisss culturally responsive strategies can be arranged 4. Human factors
into three groups, based on the level of familiarity (.low, TECHNOLOGICAL FACTORS
moderate, high): Technological changes have made a major impact upon
the peoples lives and work. Because of the rapid change in
LOW FAMLIARITY: the technology the need of counseling arises and it comes
into existence.
Employ agents or advisers (unilateral strategy) PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS
Bring in a mediator (joint strategy) The growth of counseling is
Induce the other negotiator to use your approach (joint also because of Psychological
strategy) factors. As a part of broader
field of psychology the
MODERATE FAMILIARITY: counseling is being introduced
for the development into it.

Prof. Amit Kumar

amit040985@gmail.com 22
FIT Group of Institutions
EDUCATIONAL FACTORS LASTLY
Modern counseling is a product Over the past five decades counselors have
of education system especially gained overwhelming acceptance from society.
American education system. It A large number of sub-specialities have
has deep roots in the concern developed to serve in setting such as schools,
for an individuals freedom, mental health clinics, rehabilitation centers,
rights, and dignity. The colleges.
development of counseling can best APPROACHES OF COUNSELING
be appreciated by analyzing the 1. Psychoanalytic approach
various issues that affected and 2. Bahaviouristic approach
influence its development. 3. Humanistic approach
HUMAN FACTORS
There are several mutually PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH
opposed conceptions of Psychoanalysis was originated by SIGMUND
the basic human nature. Is FREUD, who developed his theory from his
human nature either evil, or past experiences as a therapist and wrote
good, or neutral? This factor about his work. In this the client is ignorant
of human nature also helps And unaware of the reasons for his difficulties
in the emergence of the or suffering which are deeply embedded in
counseling. the unconscious. The client is therefore
GROWTH OF COUNSELING helpless and it is the therapist who has to play
The growth of counseling is divided into four phases. They the role of interpreting the material. This
are: principle is known as psychological
1. 1850-1900 determinism.
2. 1900-1930
3. 1930-1940 BEHAVIOURISTIC APPROACH
4. Second world war and after Counseling and psychotherapy are
1850-1900 concerned with behavior change.
Under this period the innovations in the field of learning here is understood as changes
psychology were made. under this period the in the behavior which are relatively
the first psychological laboratory was founded at long-lasting and which are not due to
Leipzig by Wilhelm Wundt in 1879. However, it the psychological factors like fatigue
was Jesse b. Davis who first used the term etc. one such application is in the form
counseling in this period. of Bahaviouristic approach. Its purpose
1900-1930 is to change the ineffective and self
During the first few years of the twentieth century several defeating behavior into the effective
significant events took place. These movements boosted and self winning behavior.
efforts to develop knowledge and services in order to
assist the individuals. Unfortunately there is a wrong
impression that counseling is a poor mans psychotherapy. HUMANISTIC APPROACH
All these factors helps in the emergence of the counseling. The practical application of the humanistic
1930-1940 Psychology made a great impact on the
Under this era the workers needs the guidance for academic scene. According to ROGERS in
suitable tools and techniques to understand the any kind of psychotherapy the basic theme
concept of counseling. There were very few is the helping relationship. In all human
Psychological tests available and few persons were Interactions such as mother-child,
trained to use them at that time. teacher-pupil, therapist-client The helping
SECOND WORLD WAR AND AFTER relationship is fundamental. This
In this era a book was published as counseling and relationship is one in which the counselor
psychotherapy by Carl Rogers in 1942. Before this seeks to bring about a better expression of
there was a hesitation regarding the acceptability of the clients inner resources. Thus the
counseling as a form of psychotherapy. In this era helping relationship helps in the growth of
counseling person.
obtained the recognition by the American Psychological
association(APA). The APA accepted the recommendation
of
meeting and designated counseling psychology as its
seventeenth division.

Prof. Amit Kumar

amit040985@gmail.com 23
FIT Group of Institutions