International Negotiations Chapter 4

30 August 2022
4.7 (114 reviews)
22 test answers

Unlock all answers in this set

Unlock answers (18)
question
Some consequences of failed planning are:
answer
1. Negotiators fail to set clear goals. 2. Negotiators fail to set clear objectives or targets that serve as benchmarks for evaluating offers and packages in progressing toward their goal. 3. If negotiators have not done their home, then they may not understand the strengths and weaknesses of their own positions or recognize comparable strengths and weaknesses in the other party's arguments. 4. Negotiators need to consider their alternatives to doing the deal in front of them. 5. Negotiators cannot simply depend on being quick and clever during the give-and-take of negotiation.
question
Relationship between key steps in the planning process.
answer
1. goals. 2. strategy. 3. planning.
question
One study of successful negotiators (compare with "average" negotiators)
answer
1. explored a wider range of options for action. 2. worked harder to find common ground with the other party. 3. spent more time considering the long-term implications of the issues. 4. were significantly more likely to set upper and lower limits, or the boundaries of a "range" of acceptable settlements.
question
There are four ways that goals affect negotiation:
answer
1. Wishes are not goals, especially in negotiation. 2. One's goals may be, but are not necessarily, linked to the other party's goals. 3. There are boundaries or limits to what "realistic" goals can be. 4. Effective goals must be concrete, specific, and measurable.
question
Strategy versus tactics
answer
Tactics are short-term, adaptive moves designed to enact or pursue broad (or higher-level) strategies, which in turn provide stability, continuity, and direction for tactical behaviors.
question
Unilateral versus bilateral approaches to strategy
answer
A unilateral choice is one that is made without the active involvement of the other party.
question
Dual concerns model
answer
If SUBSTANTIVE outcome is NOT important but RELATIONAL outcome IS important, then this is called ACCOMMODATION! If substantive AND relational outcomes are BOTH NOT important, then this is called AVOIDANCE! If SUBSTANTIVE outcome IS important and RELATIONAL outcome is NOT important, then this is called COMPETITION! If substantive AND relational outcome are BOTH important, then this is called collaboration.
question
There are many reasons why negotiators might choose not to negotiate:
answer
1. If one is able to meet one's needs without negotiating at all, then it may make sense to use an avoidance strategy. 2. It simply may not be worth the time and effort to negotiate (although there are sometimes reasons to negotiate in such situations). 3. The decision to negotiate is closely related to the attractiveness of available alternatives - the outcomes that can be achieved if negotiations do not work out.
question
Each of the three negotiations also has certain predictable drawbacks if the strategy is applied blindly, thoughtlessly, or inflexibly:
answer
1. Distributive strategies tend to create "we-they" or "superiority-inferiority" patterns and may lead to distortions in judgment regarding the other side's contributions and efforts, as well as to distortions in perceptions of the other side's motives, needs, and positions. 2. If a negotiator pursues an integrative strategy without regard to the other's strategy, then the other may manipulate and exploit the collaborator and take advantage of the good faith and goodwill being demonstrated. 3. Accommodative strategies may generate a pattern of repeatedly giving in to keep the other happy or to avoid a fight.
question
Greenhalgh suggests that there are seven key steps to an ideal negotiation process:
answer
1. Preparation. 2. Relationship building. 3. Information gathering. 4. Information using. 5. Bidding. 6. Closing the deal. 7. Implementing the agreement.
question
Effective planning requires hard work through considering the following points:
answer
1. Define the negotiating goal. 2. Defining the major issues related to achieving the goal. 3. Assembling the issues, ranking their importance, and defining the bargaining mix. 4. Defining the interests. 5. Knowing your alternatives (BATNA = best alternative to a negotiated agreement). 6. Knowing your limits, including a resistance point. 7. Analyzing and understanding the other party's goals, issues, and resistance points. 8. Setting one's own targets and opening bids. 9. Assessing the social context of negotiation (for example, who is at the table, who is not at the table but has a strong interest in the negotiation outcomes, and who is observing and critiquing the negotiation). 10. Presenting the issues to the other party: substance and process.
question
Before commencing, we want to note four things:
answer
1. First, we assume that a single planning process can be followed for both a distributive and an integrative process. 2. Second, at this point in the book, we have concentrated on distributive and integrative processes and the differences between them. 3. Third, we assume that negotiations will be conducted primarily one to one - that is,you and another individual negotiator. 4. We describe these steps in a relatively linear fashion, complete and up-to-date planning will require a certain degree of shuttling back and forth between steps to ensure alignment of strategy and plan.
question
In any negotiation, a complete list of the issues at stake is best derived from the following sources:
answer
1. an analysis of all the possible issues that need to be decided. 2. previous experience in similar negotiations (e.g., buying your fifth house versus buying your first). 3. research conducted to father information (e.g., study the neighborhood, have the house inspected, or read up on how to buy a house). 4. consultation with experts in that industry (real estate agents, mortgage lenders, attorneys, home repair experts, or friends who have bought a house recently).
question
Prioritization includes two steps:
answer
1. Determine which issues are most important and which are less important. 2. Determine whether the issues are linked together or separate.
question
Like goals, interests may be
answer
1. substantive: directly related to the focal issues under negotiation. 2. process-based: related to how the negotiators behave as they negotiate. 3. relationship-based: tied to the current or desired future relationship between the parties.
question
In order to know the information that one parts needs about the other party in order to prepare effectively, several key pieces of background information will be of great importance, including their
answer
1. broad, overall goals and objectives. 2. issues and the likely bargaining mix. 3. interests and needs. 4. resistance point and alternatives.
question
Information about the party's major issues, resources, current interests, and needs can be obtained through a variety of approaches:
answer
1. Conducting a preliminary interview, including a broad discussion of what the other party would like to achieve in the upcoming negotiations (focus on broad interests, not just issues). 2. Anticipating the other party's interests (as if you were "in their shoes.") 3. Asking others who know or have negotiated with the other party. 4. Reading how the other party portrays himself or herself in the media.
question
There are several principles to keep in mind when setting a target point:
answer
1. Targets should be specific, difficult but achievable, and verifiable. 2. Target setting requires proactive thinking about one's own objectives. 3. Target setting may require considering how to package several issues and objectives. 4. Target setting requires an understanding of tradeoffs and throwaways.
question
Assessing constituents is the same as assessing all the parties who are in the soccer stadium:
answer
1. Who is, or should be, on my team on my side of the field? 2. Who is on the other side of the field? 3. Who is on the sidelines and can affect the play of the game? 4. Who is in the stands? 5. What is going on in the broader environment in which the negotiation takes place? a. What is the history of the relationship with the other party, and how does it affect the overall expectations that they bring to this negotiation? b. What kind of relationship with the other party is expected or desired for the future, and how do these expectations affect the current negotiation? c. How often do we expect to negotiate in the future? d. What are the deadlines or time limits? e. What are the "rules of the game" by which this agreement will be managed? f. What is common and acceptable practice in the ethical system in which the deal is being done?
question
A negotiator can ask these questions:
answer
1. What facts support my point of view? How can I validate this information as credible? 2. Whom may I consult or talk with to help me elaborate or clarify the facts? 3. Have these issues been negotiated before by others under similar circumstances? 4. What is the other party's point of view likely to be? 5. How can I develop and present the facts so that they are most convincing?
question
Pendergast suggests give major concerns to be considered in developing a negotiation agenda:
answer
1. Scope: what issues should be considered? 2. Sequence: In what order should these issues be addressed? 3. Framing: How should the issues be presented? 4. Packaging: Should the issues be taken one at a time, or in various groupings/packages? 5. Formula: Should we strive to first get an agreement on general principles, or should we immediately begin to discuss each of the issues?
question
Questions to ask if you want to agree on what issues will be discussed on the agenda before engaging in the substantive discussion of those issues.
answer
1. Where should we negotiate? 2. What is the time period of the negotiation? 3. What might be done if negotiation fails? 4. How will we keep track of what is agreed to? 5. Have we created a mechanism for modifying the deal if necessary?