CONFLICT & NEGOTIATIONS

CHAPTER 14
“I would rather have questions that
can’t be answered, than answers
that can’t be questioned.”
 CONFLICT

The need to understand conflict seems more important now than

ever.
Conflict is inevitable.
Conflicts are happening all around the world at many different
levels:
Interpersonal
Social
Local
National
International
Ongoing Armed Conflict
CONFLICT
CONFLICT
 CHARACTERISTICS OF CONFLICT

Economic contexts, cultural identities and belongingness, and

the political and religious contexts all work together to shape
conflict.
 NATURE OF CONFLICT

• Is conflict inherently good or bad?

• Should conflict be welcomed because it provides opportunities
to strengthen relationships?
• Should it be avoided because it can only lead to problems?
• What is the best way to handle conflict when it arises?
• Should people talk about it directly, deal with it indirectly, or
avoid it entirely?
 NATURE OF CONFLICT

Opportunity orientation – conflict that is most commonly

represented in U.S. interpersonal communication.
• Conflict is usually defined as involving a perceived or real
incompatibility of goals, values, expectations, processes, or
outcomes between two or more interdependent individuals or
groups.
This approach to conflict is based on four assumptions:
1. Conflict is a normal, useful process.
2. All issues are subject to change through negotiation.
3. Direct confrontation and conciliation are valued.
4. Conflict is a necessary renegotiation of an implied contract –
a redistribution of opportunity, release of tensions, and
renewal of relationships.
 NATURE OF CONFLICT

Destructive orientation – conflict, to many cultural groups, view it as

ultimately unproductive for relationships – a perspective that may be
rooted in spiritual or cultural values.
This approach to conflict is based on four assumptions:
1. Conflict is a destructive disturbance of the peace.
2. The social system should not be adjusted to meet the needs of
members; rather, members should adapt to established values.
3. Confrontations are destructive and ineffective.
4. Disputants should be disciplined.
 NATURE OF CONFLICT

Pacifism – opposition to violence and dictates a nonresistant response,

such as avoidance or silence.
• Nonviolence is not the absence of conflict, and it is not a simple
refusal to fight – it is a difficult (and sometimes risky) orientation to
interpersonal relationships.
The “peacemaking” approach:
1. Strongly values other people and encourages their growth.
2. Attempts to deescalate conflicts or keep them from escalating
once they start.
3. Favors creative negotiations to resolve conflicts when they
arise.
 LOW-CONFLICT

Low-conflict societies share several characteristics:

• Interpersonal practices that build security and trust.
• Strong linkage between individual and community interests.
• High identification with the community – individuals and
groups in conflict share mutual interests.
• Preference for joint problem solving.
• Third parties to facilitate conflict management.
• Emphasis on the restoration of social harmony.
• Possibility of exit as a viable option and strategies of conflict
avoidance.
 CONFLICT STYLES

Five specific styles of managing conflicts:

1) Dominating style – a strategy whereby an individual achieves his or
her goal at the expense of others’ needs.
2) Integrating style – a strategy characterized by the open and direct
exchange of information in an attempt to reach a solution acceptable to
both parties.
3) Compromising style – a strategy that involves sharing and
exchanging information to the extent that both individuals give up
something to find a mutually acceptable decision.
4) Obliging style – a strategy characterized by playing down differences
and incompatibilities while emphasizing commonalities.
5) Avoiding style – a strategy characterized in U.S. cultural contexts by a
low concern for the self and others. In some other cultural contexts,
however, this strategy may be seen as tactical in maintaining
harmonious relationships.
 SOCIAL CONFLICT

Social conflict – arises from unequal or unjust social

relationships between groups.
• Social
• Economic
• Political
• Historical
Social movements – organized activities in which individuals
work together to bring about social change.
CONFLICT POST-9/11
(DOMESTIC – USA)
ASIAN FINANCIAL CRISIS 1997
 CONFLICT POST-9/11
(INTERNATIONAL)

“Axis of Evil” declared by U.S. President George W. Bush on

January 29, 2002.
Iran
Iraq
North Korea

“Axis of Resistance” formed by Iran as a political alliance to

counter U.S. hegemony.
Iran
Syria
Hezbollah (Lebanon)
 DEALING WITH CONFLICT

• Stay centered and do not polarize.

• Maintain contact – dialogue
• Recognize the existence of different styles.
• Identify your preferred style.
• Be creative and expand your style repertoire.
• Recognize the importance of conflict context.
• Be willing to forgive.
 DEALING WITH CONFLICT

The U.S. Vietnam Post-Conflict Story:

Reconciliation efforts towards normalization:
• Establishing the POW-MIA office in Hanoi in the
early 1990’s.
 INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATIONS

Integrative negotiation is a negotiation strategy in

which parties collaborate to find a “win-win” solution
to their conflict.
Integrative negotiation focuses on developing
mutually beneficial agreements based on interests of
disputants. It is also called interest-based negotiation.
Interests include needs, desires, concerns, and fears.
 INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATIONS

Interest-based negotiations
Principle 1: Separate the People from the Problem
Principle 2: Focus on Interests, not Positions
Principle 3: Invent Options for Mutual Gain
Principle 4: Insist on Objective Criteria
SEPARATE PEOPLE FROM PROBLEM

Principle 1: Separate the People from the Problem

• Negotiators are people first.
• Every negotiator has two kinds of interests: in the
Substance and in the Relationship.
• The relationship tends to become entangled with the
problem.
• Position Bargaining puts relationship and substance in
conflict.
SEPARATE PEOPLE FROM PROBLEM

We all perceive our world differently and often take

different if not opposing viewpoints when handling a
problem or dispute with another person.
We tend to approach a problem or dispute with our own
unique perspective often giving little or any regard to
the other person’s perspective.
SEPARATE PEOPLE FROM PROBLEM

Separate the relationship from the substance; deal

directly with the problem.
• Perception
• Emotion
• Communication
 PERCEPTION

• Put yourself in their shoes (Empathy).

• Don't deduce their intentions from your fear.
• Don't blame them for your problem.
• Discuss each other's perceptions.
• Look for opportunities to act inconsistently with their
perception.
• Give them a stake in the outcome by making sure they
participate in the process.
• Face saving: make your proposals consistent with their values.
 EMOTION

• First recognize and understand emotions.

• Yours and theirs.
• Make emotions explicit and acknowledge them as legitimate.
• Allow the other side to let off steam.
• Don't react to emotional outbursts.
• Use symbolic gestures.
 EMOTION

Use a simple framework for circumventing the complexities of

emotion.
• Negotiators need to turn their attention to five core concerns,
matters that are important to most of us much of the time.
• These core concerns can be used as a “tool” to understand the
emotional terrain in a negotiation and as a “lever” to stimulate
helpful emotions. As a result, cooperative behavior becomes
more likely.
 FIVE CORE CONCERNS

1) Appreciation: Are our thoughts, feelings, and actions

devalued, or are they acknowledged as having merit?
2) Autonomy: Is our freedom to make decisions impinged
upon, or is it respected?
3) Affiliation: Are we treated as an adversary and kept at a
distance, or are we treated as a colleague?
4) Status: Is our standing treated as inferior to others, or is it
given full recognition where deserved?
5) Role: Are the many roles we play meaningless, or are they
personally fulfilling?
 COMMUNICATION

• Listen actively and acknowledge what is being said.

• Speak to be understood.
• Speak about yourself, not about them.
• Speak for a purpose.
 FOCUS ON INTERESTS

Principle 2: Focus on Interests, not Positions

• Positions: What you want in a negotiation: price, job,
work schedule, change in someone else’s behavior,
revised contract provision, etc.
• Interests: Underlying desires or concerns that
motivate people in particular situations.
• Status, principles, value relationships and/or time.
 FOCUS ON INTERESTS

Arguing over positions……..

• Produces unwise agreements and is inefficient.
• Endangers an ongoing relationship.
• As more attention is paid to positions, less attention is devoted
to meeting the underlying concerns and interests of the parties.
• When there are many parties, positional bargaining is even
worse.
• Being nice and giving in is no answer.
 FOCUS ON INTERESTS

How to identify interests:

“Why do you want this?" and "Why not?“
• Think about their choice.
Realize that each side has multiple interests.
• Identify shared interests and focus on mutual options for gain.
The most powerful interests are basic human needs:
• Security (economic well-being)
• Guidance (a sense of belonging)
• Wisdom (recognition)
• Power (control over one's life)
 FOCUS ON INTERESTS

Types of Interests:
1) Substantive: Entails our own respective interests. How we
describe the issue.
2) Relational: Interpersonal relationship between the two
parties. How people should be treated.

The main problem occurs when the relationship becomes

entwined with the problem being addressed.
In positional negotiation the problem becomes personal as the
two separate interests become emotionally enmeshed with each
other.
 INTERESTS

Problem: Barking dog.

My interpretation: My neighbor doesn’t care about my needs.
My position: Quiet the dog.
My interest: I need sleep to…..?
Issue: How to control the barking?
 INTERESTS

Problem: Sea reefs are dying.

My interpretation: Inadequately controlled construction in near-
shore areas results in runoff that smothers reefs.
My position: Stop or severely limit land disturbance.
Interest: Protect the environment to…..?
Issue: What’s the real source of reef degradation? How can
runoff be reduced/controlled?
 INTERESTS

Buyer’s position: I want the price of the specialty equipment

lowered by 10%.
Buyer’s interest: We’re under pressure to stay under
budget/improve profit.

Seller’s position: The equipment must sell at full price.

Seller’s interest: To increase market share for the equipment at a
profitable price.

Solutions?
 INTERESTS

Project Manager’s position: I want a one-month extension to

finish the project.
Project Manager’s interest: I approved the lead programmer’s
vacation and want to demonstrate to my team that I fight for their
needs and keep my word.

Boss’s position: The original deadline stands and you cannot

have a one-month extension.
Boss’s interest: Get the project done on time.

Solutions?
 MUTUAL GAIN

• Good behavior in negotiation is described as creative

open-minded behavior.
• The negotiator should seek to invent new options that
might satisfy both parties' needs.
• It is also wise to take the other side's needs in account
when making new proposals.
 MUTUAL GAIN

• Don't assume there is a fixed pie and only one answer.

• Don't think solving their problem is their problem, help them.
• Separate inventing from deciding: brainstorming process.
• Broaden your options and think creatively.
• Look through the eyes of different experts.
• Invent agreement of different strengths.
• Identify shared interests.
• Ask for their preferences.
 OBJECTIVE CRITERIA

Negotiation is often linked to people's points of view and a good

way to reach a fair deal is to reference the deal to objective
criteria.

• Principled negotiation produces wise agreements amicably and

efficiently.
• Use fair standards, fair procedures.
• Never yield to pressure.
• Use a 3rd party as a referee.
 OBJECTIVE CRITERIA

Fair Standards: Market value, replacement cost, precedent,

professional standards, “best practice”, industry average, equal
treatment, etc.

Fair Procedures: Tenders, last best offers, taking turns, drawing

lots.
• Any applicable principle which denotes a true reflection of
what is realistically fair and reasonable.
 CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION IN
PRACTICE:
THE USA AND CHINA
Interpersonal Orientation: Fundamental Opposition
• For the Chinese, a
• The US sees the deal as the negotiation is just part of
main objective of any developing a life-long
negotiation relationship
• Very focussed bottom-line • Need to establish a good
approach rapport before talking of a
deal

Americans might feel that the wish by their Chinese

counterparts to establish friendship is one way to get a
better deal later on in the negotiation(s).
 CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION IN
PRACTICE:
THE USA AND CHINA
Power Orientation
• Often difficult to know who
• Clear hierarchy in US team the Chinese team leader is
• Deference shown, even if the • The consensus-building process
language used informal occurs also within
• The boss will probably be given the Chinese team (parties
much leeway – already discussed both from within as well as
with HQ outside company)
• Risk-taking seen as inherent to • Will resist pressure from the
getting the best deal possible American side until all
Chinese parties satisfied
• Any risk-taking must be
carefully orchestrated
 CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION IN
PRACTICE:
THE USA AND CHINA
Underlying Concept of Negotiation
Negotiation strategies:
Both US approaches (win–win and win–lose) should lead to a
definitive contract to which both sides are expected to adhere. The
Chinese find it difficult to take this linear approach. For them, the
negotiation is just one of many encounters. The principle is to
build a business partnership.
Strategic time frame:
For the Chinese, a deal made at the end of a negotiation remains
negotiable in the long term. Agreements are based on trust and
goodwill. This can be frustrating for Americans since for them
time is of the essence – and a deal’s a deal!
 CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION IN
PRACTICE:
THE USA AND CHINA
Style of Negotiation
• US negotiators concerned with • For the Chinese, gaining trust +
specifics, the information which confidence is more important than
allows them to pursue their way facts and figures
of negotiating • May not have information asked
• Need to gain a clearer idea of for (possible face loss). However,
the other party’s concerns and collection of information is
interests to establish or modify becoming more systematic
their goals • NB: younger managers more in
• Ready to give a lot of tune with Western behaviour
information if this is part of an norms
exchange
 CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION IN
PRACTICE:
THE USA AND CHINA
Outcome Orientations
• Chinese tend to avoid
• For US negotiators, a legalistic details
detailed contract is the ideal • Prefer short contracts that
conclusion to a negotiation: show commitment to project
signed, sealed and delivered • A contract is only a formal
• In the final phase detailed moment in development of a
points are hammered out: relationship
• Implementation • Further negotiations will
• Legal aspects happen using the goodwill and
friendship established
 CROSS-CULTURAL NEGOTIATION IN
PRACTICE:
THE USA AND CHINA

• The Chinese and American negotiators therefore face

innumerable potential difficulties
• The opposition in expectations and attitudes is clear, the
expected frustrations and irritations evident
• How can both sides resolve this dilemma? One possible
way to deal with apparently conflicting cultural values is to
use Weiss’s strategic framework.
 PREPARATIONS
NEGOTIATING ENVELOPE
Preparations are key to any negotiations
Develop your Negotiating Envelope:
• Goals
• Most Desired Outcomes (MDO)
• Least Acceptable Agreements (LAA)
• Best Alternatives to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)

Understanding your boundaries (parameters) while being flexible and

creative:
• How high/low can you go?
• How long can you take?
• What should you hold in reserve?
• What is reasonable in this situation?
• And at what point should you walk away?
 PREPARATIONS
NEGOTIATING ENVELOPE

Define Your Negotiating Opportunity – Your Envelope of

Reasonability
Identify:
MDO – Most Desired Outcome – What you want and can
defend.
Goal – The more likely outcome that also addresses mutual
interests.
LAA – Least Acceptable Agreement – What you need before
walking away.
BATNA – Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement – What
you do if no agreement.
 PREPARATIONS
NEGOTIATING ENVELOPE
Most Desired Outcome (MDO) is the result you want and can
defend.
• Fact-based plan for your opening proposal.
• It is everything you want and can defend.
• It is bold and assertive, but not aggressive.
• Although it is not always achieved, the MDO is achievable. If no
one has ever gotten the MDO you seek, it is possibly too
aggressive and not defensible.
• The MDO challenges you and the other side to be more creative.
• Must-haves are included in your MDO.
• Often also called your Stretch Goal.
 PREPARATIONS
NEGOTIATING ENVELOPE

A Goal is a likely and easily reached outcome that addresses

both parties’ interests.
• A negotiator’s goal, like all goals in life, is
1. Definable
2. Measurable
3. Attainable
4. Shared internally
5. Aligned externally
• Research shows that people with well-defined goals achieved
outcomes closer to their MDO, and those without well-defined
goals end up closer to their LAA.
 PREPARATIONS
NEGOTIATING ENVELOPE

Least Acceptable Agreement (LAA) is the minimum you need

before walking away.
• It is the minimum you are willing to accept, and so forms one
of the outside parameters of your negotiating envelope.
• If you can achieve any result between your LAA and MDO,
you are better with an agreement than without one.
• Your LAA is broader than a bottom line because it satisfies
interests and covers multiple issues. Bottom line has a more
negative connotation as an unsatisfactory result taken
reluctantly.
 BATNA

Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement – Is the

best possible next step if the negotiations fail and the
importance of analyzing the best possible alternative
and alternate plan.
 FEATURES OF BATNA

• Aids in Determining the Importance of Negotiation: It helps determine

the best alternative in case of an unsuccessful negotiation deal.
• Analyzes the Best Alternative: It helps to analyze the best alternative from
all the alternatives available to gain the maximum.
• Helps to Reduce the Unavoidable Cost: It also helps determine the
maximum value the buyer can pay for the deal at which the best alternative
is available for the buyer to cut the unnecessary, avoidable cost.
• Determines the Strategies for Negotiations: Best Alternative to a
Negotiated Agreement also aids in determining the strategies for the
negotiations to make the deal successful at the price beneficial for both
buyer and seller.
 IDENTIFYING BATNA

Identifying BATNA using the following steps and actions:

• List out all the strategies to make the negotiation possible.
• Determine the maximum cost if negotiation is favorable.

List out all the options available as Alternatives.

• Analyze the Best possible Alternative.
• Analyze the cost of the Best Possible Alternative and compare it with the
maximum cost of negotiation.
• If the cost of the best possible alternative is lower than the maximum cost of
negotiation, then the Best Alternative is said to be BATNA.