Naturaleza De Las Negociaciones

Nature of Negotiations (Lewicki Roy, 2001)

People negotiate all the time. Friends negotiate to decide where to have diner. Children negotiate to decide which television program to watch. Businesses negotiate to purchase materials and to sell their products. Lawyers negotiate to settle legal claims before they go to court. The police negotiate with terrorist to free hostages. Nations negotiate to open their borders for free trade. Negotiation is not a process reserved only for the skilled diplomat, top salespersons, or ardent advocate for organized labor; it is something that every does, almost daily. The structure and processes of negotiation are fundamentally the same at the personal level as they are diplomatic and corporate levels.

Negotiations occur for one of two reasons: (1) to create something new that neither party could do on his or her own, or (2) to resolve a problem or dispute between the parties. Because people can negotiate about some many different things, understanding the fundamental process of negotiation is essential for anyone who works with other people.

Characteristics of a negotiation or bargaining situation

We identify them as negotiation situations because they have fundamentally the same characteristics as peace negotiations between countries at war, business negotiations between two corporations, or a hostage crisis involving police and radical political group. There are several characteristics common to all negotiations simulations.

Interdependence

In negotiation, parties need each other to achieve their preferred outcomes or objectives.

This mutual dependency is called interdependence.

Interdependent goals are an important aspect of negotiation.

• Win-lose: I win, you lose.

• Win-win: Opportunities for both parties to gain.

Interdependent parties are characterized by interlocking goals.

Having interdependent goals does not mean that everyone wants or needs exactly the same thing.

A mix of convergent and conflicting goals characterizes many interdependent relationships.

Types of Interdependence Affect Outcomes

Interdependence and the structure of the situation shape processes and outcomes

• Zero-sum or distributive – one winner

• Non-zero-sum or integrative – mutual gains situation

Alternatives Shape Interdependence

Evaluating interdependence depends heavily on the alternatives to working together

The desirability to work together is better for outcomes

Best available alternative: BATNA (acronym for Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement)

Mutual Adjustment

Continues throughout the negotiation as both parties act to influence the other

One of the key causes of the changes that occur during a negotiation

The effective negotiator needs to understand how people will adjust and readjust and how the negotiations might twist and turn, based on one’s own moves and the other’s responses.

Mutual Adjustment and Concession Making

When one party agrees to make a change in his/her position, a concession has been made.

Concessions restrict the range of options.

When a concession is made, the bargaining range is further constrained.

Two Dilemmas in Mutual Adjustment

• Dilemma of honesty

• Concern about how much of the truth to tell the other party

Value Claiming and Value Creation

Opportunities to “win” or share resources.

Claiming value: result of zero-sum or distributive situations where the object is to gain largest piece of resource.

Creating value: result of non-zero-sum or integrative situation where object is to have both parties do well.

Most actual negotiations are a combination of claiming and creating value processes.

Negotiators must be able to recognize situations that require more of one approach than the other.

Negotiators must be versatile in their comfort and use of both major strategic approaches

Negotiator perceptions of situations tend to be biased toward seeing problems as more distributive/ competitive than they really are.

Value differences that exist between negotiators include:

• Differences in interest

• Differences in judgments about the future

• Differences in risk tolerance

• Differences in time preferences

Conflict

One potential consequence of interdependent relationships

...