The document discusses research on skilled negotiators and how they differ from average negotiators in their planning and approach. Some key findings include: 1) Skilled negotiators take a long-term approach to planning rather than focusing on short-term issues. 2) They consider a wider range of options rather than fixating on a single outcome. 3) Skilled negotiators set flexible limits in terms of ranges rather than rigid limits.

1. The Social
Context of
Negotiation:
“Field”
Analysis

3. Investigative
• Principle 1: Don’t Just Ask What—ask Why
• Principle 2: Seek To Reconcile Interests, Not Demands
• Principle 3: Create Common Ground With Uncommon Allies
• Principle 4: Interpret Demands As Opportunities
• Principle 5: Don’t Dismiss Anything As “Their Problem”
• Principle 6: Don’t Let Negotiations End With A Rejection Of Your Offer
• Principle 7: Understand The Difference Between “Selling” And
“Negotiating”

4. Bias

6. Bias Perception:
Fixed Pie
• the erroneous belief that the other
party’s interests are directly opposed
to one’s own interests when, in fact,
they are often not completely opposed.

8. Bias Perception:
Thompson and Hastie
Explored the consequences for outcomes.
They measured individual fixed-pie perceptions after just five minutes of
negotiation
They found fixed pie predicted individual and joint negotiation payoffs such that
fixed-pie perceptions were associated with lower individual and joint profits.
Negotiators with strong fixed-pie perceptions failed to identify interests that
could be profitably logrolled or that were completely compatible.

9. Bias Perception:
Why does this occur?
Biased information search
•(negotiators’ faulty search for necessary information)
Biased information processing
•(negotiators’ faulty processing of available
information).

10. Bias Perception:
Extremism
Partisan perceivers believe that their own perceptions map onto
objective reality.
When they realize that the other side’s views differ from their own,
they first attempt to “straighten out” the other side; when this does
not work, they regard the other side as extremist.
partisan perceivers tend to view the other side as having interests
that are more opposed to their own than is actually the case.

11. Bias
Perception:
Problems with
Extremism
• Exacerbates conflict
• Partisan perceivers ascribe more negative
traits to their negotiating partner even
when partisanship has been randomly
assigned right before the negotiation
• Reduces the likelihood of reaching
comprehensive integrative agreements
during face-to-face negotiations

12. Bias Perception:
Reactive
Devaluation
Bias
• Negotiators discount or dismiss
concessions made by the other party
merely as a function of who is offering
them

13. Bias
Perception:
Stillinger,
Epelbaum,
Kelter, and
Ross
(1990)
• Participants negotiated with a confederate over the policy of their university regarding
a political issue.
Experiment
• The antagonism of the negotiating confederate was held constant.
• During the negotiation, the confederate for a time adopted a stubborn position.
Constant
• In two experimental conditions, however, the confederate ultimately made a
concession; in the third (control) condition, no concession at all was made.
Concession
• Subsequently, participants rated the attractiveness and significance of a number of
different proposals, including the ones that had been offered in their negotiation
session.
Rating
• Non-offered concessions were rated as more attractive and significant than offered
concessions:
• The very fact that their counterpart offered them a concession diminished its value in
the eyes of the participants.
Results

14. Bias Perception:
Fundamental Attribution Error
People tend to view
• their own behavior as largely determined by the situation
• BUT
• B. regard other’s behavior as driven by chronic dispositions
Larrick and Su (1999)
• Demonstrated this bias operated in negotiation.
• Negotiators erroneously attributed tough bargaining behaviors to difficult personalities rather
than to situational factors.
• Fundamental attribution error often results from lack of sufficient information about the
opponent’s situation.

15. Bias Perception:
Coercion Bias
• People erroneously believe that
• A. coercive tactics will be effective in
generating concessions when dealing with
opponents
• BUT
B. believe that these same tactics, when applied
to the self, will have the opposite effect—that is,
to increase their resolve not to concede.
• Rothbart and Hallmark (1988) in-group and
outgroup members differed in the judged efficacy
of coercion and conciliation as social influence
strategies.
• Out-group members perceived coercion as more
effective than conciliation when applied to others,
• In-group members perceived coercion as less
effective than conciliation when applied to their
own social or categorical group members.

16. Motivational Biases

17. Motivational
Biases
Self-enhancement,
Closure and consistency,
Cooperation (maximization of shared
goals)
Accountability (or constituency pressure)

18. Self-
Enhancement
• One of the most fundamental goals of human
life is the preservation and maintenance of self-
identity.
• De Dreu, Nauta, and van de Vliert (1995) found
that negotiators tend to make self-serving
evaluations of conflict behavior.
• self-serving evaluation of conflict behaviorwas
associated with increased frustration,
• reduced problem solving, and enhanced
likelihood of future conflict.
• Thus, self-enhancement may be a central
motivational antecedent of conflict escalation.

19. Egocentric Bias
• Egocentrism leads negotiators to
perceive fairness in a biased manner
• Specifically, the egocentric bias tends
to make parties believe that it is fair for
them to have more of the negotiated
• Negotiators claim what they want and,
at the same time, believe that their
claim is fair.
• Egocentrism leads parties to anticipate
that others will make over-harvesting
decisions and deplete common goods

20. Self-affirmation
theory
• People experience a threat to their self-
esteem, they need to affirm the self
(Steele, 1988).
• When people are given feedback indicating
that they have not performed well on a
task, they are more likely to promote
themselves
• Derogating a stereotyped target increases
the self-esteem of people whose self-
image has been threatened (Fein and
Spencer, 1997).
• More likely to evaluate that person
stereotypically if their self-images have
been threatened by negative feedback
(Fein and Spencer, 1997).

21. Communication
in Negotiation
Communication processes, both
verbal and nonverbal, are critical to
achieving negotiation goals and to
resolving conflicts.
Negotiation is a process of
interaction
Negotiation is a context for
communication subtleties that
influence processes and outcomes

22. Distortion in
Communication
1. Senders and receivers
2. Transmitters and receptors
3. Messages
4. Encoding
5. Channels
6. Decoding
7. Meaning
8. Feedback

23. What Is
Communicated
during
Negotiation?
Offers, counteroffers, and motives
Information about alternatives
Information about outcomes
Social accounts
Explanations of mitigating
circumstances
Explanations of exonerating
circumstances
Reframing explanations
Communication about process

24. How People
Communicate
in Negotiation
• Logical level (proposals, offers)
• Pragmatic level (semantics, syntax, style)
Use of language
• Making eye contact
• Adjusting body position
• Nonverbally encouraging or discouraging
what the other says
Use of nonverbal communication

25. How People
Communicate
in Negotiation
• Selection of a communication channel
• Communication is experienced differently
when it occurs through different channels
• People negotiate through a variety of
communication media – by phone, in
writing and increasingly through electronic
channels or virtual negotiations
• Social presence distinguishes one
communication channel from another.
• the ability of a channel to carry and
convey subtle social cues from sender to
receiver

26. Four Biases
that Threaten
E-mail
Negotiations
• Tendency for negotiators to behave as if they are
in a synchronous situation when they are not
1. Temporal synchrony bias
• Tendency to do risky things during e-mail that
would not be used in a face-to-face encounter
2. Burned bridge bias
• Tendency to use a negative emotional style
3. Squeaky wheel bias
• Overlooking the role of situational factors
4. Sinister attribution bias

27. How to Improve
Communication in Negotiation
• Use of questions: two basic categories
• Manageable
• Cause attention or prepare the other person’s thinking for further
questions:
• “May I ask you a question?”
• getting information
• “How much will this cost?”
• generating thoughts
• “Do you have any suggestions for improving this?”

28. How to Improve
Communication in Negotiation
• Use of questions: two basic categories
• Unmanageable questions
• Cause difficulty
• “Where did you get that dumb idea?”
• give information
• “Didn’t you know we couldn’t afford this?”
• bring the discussion to a false conclusion
• “Don’t you think we have talked about this enough?”

29. Spin Questions
Situation
Questions
1
Problem
Questions
2
Implication
Questions
3
Need
Questions
4

30. Situation
Questions
1. What equipment are you using now?
2. How long have you had it?
3. Is it purchased or leased?
4. How many people use it?

31. Problem
Questions
1. Are you satisfied with your present
equipment?
2. What are the disadvantages of the way you’re
doing it now?
3. How difficult is it to process orders with your
present system?
4. What reliability problems does your
equipment have now?

32. Implication
Questions
1. Does your overtime expense increase when
your equipment goes down?
2. Do bottlenecks result because you only have
two people who can operate your order
processing system?
3. Are you experiencing high turnover and
training costs because of he difficulty that
your employees are having in operating your
equipment?

33. Need
Questions
1. How do you feel a faster machine will help
you?
2. Is there any other way that a machine might
help?
3. Would it help if a new system could reduce
your employee turnover?
4. You said a new machine would be really
useful, Useful in reducing your training costs,
or is there something else?

34. How to use SPIN Questions
Write down
Write down at least
three potential
problems which the
prospect may have
and which your
products might solve
before making a sales
call.
Write down
Write down some
actual Problem
Questions that you
could ask to uncover
each of the potential
problems you’ve
identified.
Ask
Ask yourself what
difficulties might
arise for each
problem. Write down
some actual
Implication Questions
that might get the
prospect to see the
problem as large and
urgent to solve.
Write down
Write down three
Need Questions for
each implication.

35. 6-35 McGraw-Hill/Irwin
©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies,
Inc., All Rights Reserved
Special Communication Considerations at the
Close of Negotiations
• Avoiding fatal mistakes
• Keeping track of what you expect to happen
• Systematically guarding yourself against self-serving
expectations
• Reviewing the lessons from feedback for similar decisions
in the future
• Achieving closure
• Avoid surrendering important information needlessly
• Refrain from making “dumb remarks”

36. Negotiation
and Power

38. The Social Context of Negotiation:
“Field” Analysis

39. Curry
Negotiation reconnaissance

40. Skilled Negotiators

42. 1. Skilled Negotiators: Amount of time
planning
No significant difference was found between the total planning time
which skilled and average negotiators claimed they spent prior to
actual negotiation

43. 2. Long term Planning
Long-term or Short-term?
Skilled Long term

44. 3. Skilled Negotiators: Sequence v. Issue
Planning
Average Negotiators more reliant on sequence planning
Skilled Negotiators more likely to use issue planning (more flexible
plan)

45. 4. Skilled Negotiators: Exploration of Options
skilled negotiators considered a wider range of outcomes or
options than did average negotiators, they seem to demonstrate a
willingness to consider counterparts' options

46. 5. Skilled Negotiators:Setting Limits
skilled negotiators are significantly more likely to set upper and
lower limits, planning was done in terms of ranges, more flexible
than average negotiators

47. 6. Common Ground
• Skilled search more common ground

48. 1.Avoid Skilled Negotiators: Irritators
skilled negotiators tended to avoid saying gratuitous things about
themselves, avoided self descriptions of "fair" or "reasonable" and
comments such as generous offer

49. 2 .Avoid Skilled Negotiators: Defend/Attack
Spirals
Skilled negotiators, if they decided to attack, gave no warning and
attacked severely

50. 3. Skilled Negotiators: Argument
Dilution/counter proposals
skilled negotiators used fewer reasons to back up each of his/her
arguments only moving to subsidiary reasons only if main reason
began to wither.

51. 4.Avoid. Behavior lableling
• If I could make a suggestion,
• If I could be sol bold to ask,
• I might consede

52. Frame
Reframe