N7 Finding and Using Negotiation Power

In this chapter, we discussed the nature of power in negotiation. We recommend that there are two major ways to think about power, "power over", which suggests that power is fundamentally domination and coercive in nature and "power with" suggesting that power is jointly shared with the other party to collectively develop joint goals and objective.

N6 Communication

This chapter focuses on leverage in negotiation. By leverage, we mean the tools negotiators can use to give themselves and advantage or increase the probability of achieving their objective. Leverage is often used synonymously with power.

Most negotiators believe that power is important in negotiation, because it gives one negotiator an advantage over the other party. Negotiators who have this advantage usually want to use it to secure a negotiation usually arises from one of two perception:
1. The negotiator believes he or she currently has less leverage than the other parties, so he or she seek power to offset or counterbalance that advantage.
2. The negotiator believes he or she needs more leverage than the other party to increase the probability of securing a desired outcome.

In general, negotiators who don’t care about their power or who have matched power—equally high or low—will find that their deliberation proceed with greater ease and simplicity toward a mutually satisfying and acceptable outcome. Power is implicated in the use of many negotiation tactics, such as hinting to the other party that you have good alternatives (a strong BATNA) in order to increase your leverage.In general, people have power when they have “the ability to bring about outcomes they desire” or “the ability to get things done the way them to be done.”

Three sources of power: information and expertise control over resources, and the location within an organizational structure (which leads to either formal authority or informal power based on where one is located relative to flows of information or resources).The concept of leverage in relation to the use of power and influence.

It is important to be clear about the distinction between the two. We treat power as the potential to alter the attitudes and behaviors of others that an individual brings to a given situation. Influence, on the other hand, can be though of as power in action—the actual messages and tactics an individual undertakes in order to change the attitudes and/or behaviors of others. A very large number of influence (leverage) tools that one could use in negotiation. These tools were considered in two broad categories: influence that occurs through the central route to persuasion, and influence that occurs through the peripheral route to persuasion.

In the final section of the chapter, we focuses on how to receiver—the target of influence—either can shape and direct what the sender is communicating, or can intellectually resist the persuasive effects of the message. Effective negotiators are skilled not only at crafting persuasive messages, but also at playing the role of skilled “consumers” of the messages that others direct their way.

N5 PERCEPTION, COGNITION, AND COMMUNICATION

Perception, cognition, and communication are fundamental processes that governs how individuals construct and interpret the interaction that takes place in a negotiation. Reduced to its essence, negotiation is a form of interpersonal communication, which itself is a subject of the broader category of human perception and communication.

PERCEPTION AND NEGOTIATION

The Role of Perception
Negotiators approach each negotiation guided by their perceptions of past situations and current attitudes and bahaviors. Perception is the process by which individuals connect to their environment. The process of ascribing meaning to messages received is strongly influenced by the receiver's current state of mind, role, and understanding or comprehension of earlier communications.

Perceptual Distortion in Negotiation
In any given negotiation, the perceiver's own needs, desires, motivations, and personal experiences may create a predisposition about the other party. Such predispositions are most problematic when they lead to biases and errors in perception and subsequent communication. There are four major perceptual errors: stereotyping, halo effects, selective perception, and projections. Stereotyping and halo effects are examples of perceptual distortion by generalization: small amounts of perceptual information are used to draw large conclusions about individuals. Selective perception and projection are, in contrast, examples of perceptual distortion by the anticipation of encountering certain attributes and qualities in another person. In each case, the perceiver filters and distorts information to arrive at a consistent view.

Framing
A frame is the subjective mechanism through which people evaluate and make sense out of situations, leading them to pursue or avoid subsuquent actions. Framing is about focusing, shaping, and organizing the world around us--making sense of complex realities and defining it in ways that are meaningful to us.
An important aspect of framing is the cognitive heuristics approach, which examines the ways in which negotiators make systematic errors in judgment when they process information.
The cognitive heuristic approach to framing focuses on how a party perceives and shapes the outcome (particularly with regard to risk), and how the party's frame tends to persist regardless of the events and information that follow it.

Cognitive Biases in Negotiation
Negotiators have a tendency to make systematic errors when they process information. These errors, collectively labeled cognitive biases, tend to impede negotiator performace : they include (1) the irrational escalation of commitment, (2) the mythical belief that the issues under negotiation are all fix-pie, (3) the process of anchoring and adjustment in decision making, (4) issue and problem framing, (5) the availibility of information, (6) the winner's curse, (7)negotiator overconfidence, (8) the law of small numbers, (9) self-serving biases, (10) the endowment effect, (11) the tendency to ignore others' cognitions, and (12) the process of reactive devaluation.

MANAGING MISPERCEPTIONS AND COGNITIVE BIASES IN NEGOTIATION
Misperceptions and cognitive biases arise automatically and out of conscious awareness as negotiators gather and process information. The best advice that negotiators can follow is simply to be aware of the negative aspects of these effects, and to discuss them in a structured manner within their team and with their counterparts.

Reframing
Negotiators may apply several different frames to the same negotiation. When different negotiators apply different, or mismatched, frames, they will find the bargaining process ambiagous and frustrating. In such situations, it may become necessary to reframe the negotiation systematically, to assist the other party in reframing the negotiation, or to establish a common frame or set of frames within which the negotiation may be conducted more productively.

WHAT IS COMMUNICATED DURING NEGOTIATION?
Most of the communication during negotiation is not about negotiator preferences. The blend of integrative versus distributive content varies as a function of the issues being discussed, but it also clear that the content of communication is only partly responsible for negotiation outcomes. For example, one party may choose not communicate certain things (e.g, the reason she chose a different supplier), so her counterpart (e.g., the supplier not chosen) may be unaware why some outcomes occur. There are five categories of communication that take place during negotiations:
1. Offers and Counteroffers
2. Information about Alternatives (BATNA)
3. Information about Outcomes
4. Social Accounts
5. Communications about Process

HOW PEOPLE COMMUNICATE 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 in negotiation. There are two aspects related to the "how" of communication: the characteristics of language that communicators use, and the selection of a communication channel for sending and receiving messages.

HOW TO IMPROVE COMMUNICATION IN NEGOTIATION
Failure and distortions in perception, cognition, and communication are the most dominant contributors to breakdowns and failures in negotiation. Research consistenly demonstrates that even those parties whose actual goals are compatible or integrative may either fail to reach agreement or reach suboptimal agreements because of the is perceptions of the other party or because of breakdowns in the communication in negotiation: the use of questions, listening, and role reversal.

MOOD, EMOTION, AND NEGOTIATION
The role of mood and emotion in negotiation has been the subject of an increasing body of recent theory and research during the last decade. The distinction between mood and emotion is based on three characteristics: specificity, intensity, and duration. Mood states are more diffuse, less intense and directed at more specific targets. There are amny new and exciting developments in the study of mood, emotion, and negotiation, and we can present only a limited overview here. The following are some selected findings.
1. Negotiations create both positive and negative emotions
2. Positive emotions generally have positive consequences for negotiations
-Positive feelings are more likely to lead the parties towards integrative
-Positive feelings promote persistence
-Positive feelings result from fair procedures during negotiation
3. Negative Emotions Generally Have Negative Consequences for Negotiations.
4. Emotions can be used strategically as negotiation tactics.

SPECIAL COMMUNICATION CONSIDERATIONS AT THE CLOSE OF NEGOTIATIONS
As negotiation come to a close, negotiators must attend to two key aspects of communication and negotiation simultaneously: the avoidance of fatal mistakes, and the achievment of satisfactory closure in constructive

N4 Strategy and planning

Planning is very important in the negotiation. The proper planning helps to produce the good outcome. The negotiator should understand the key issue that must be resolved in the upcoming negotiation. He should properly study all the issue. The negotiator should understand and define the key interests of the issues. The negotiator should always keep the space for other deal if the first deal is unsuccessful. One should understand others party’s goals, issues, strategies, interests, limits, alternatives, targets, openings and authority. The chapter suggests planning the process by which he/she will present the ideas to the other party. The negotiator should prepare himself or herself in such a way that he can present his ideas in a great way that impresses everyone. When a negotiator is able to consider all the above things then he will have a clear sense of direction on how to proceed.

N3: Strategy and Tactics of Integrative Negotiation

Integrative negotiation means creating the free flow of negotiation. It attempts to the other negotiators real goals and objectives. Integrative Negotiation emphasis the commonalities between the parties and minimizes the differences. It tries to meet the needs and objectives of both sides. Key steps in the Integrative Negotiation process includes: Identify and define the problem, Understand the problem fully and identify the needs and interests, generate alternative solutions and evaluate and select alternatives. Alternative solution to the problem can be generated in the form of brainstorming, surveys, electronic brainstorming and summary. According to the writer there are eight steps that facilitate successful Integrative Negotiation. They are: common objective or goal, 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, an understanding of the dynamics of Integrative Negotiation and summary.