Negotiation Strategies and Theories
Brian Anderson
Dr. Gayle Pohl
COM 665
14 March 2014
Negotiation Strategies and Theories
Most of us envision negotiations as a form of conflict where the outcome is typically one winner and one loser (or winning and losing party/group). Because both parties engaging in negotiations have something to achieve, people tend to enter negotiations emphasizing outcome and/or process goals (Katz-Navon and Goldschmidt, 2009). Differences in status, power, and gender all play highly significant roles (often times subconsciously or inadvertently) and will be discussed further analyzed in this paper. As somewhat of a disclaimer, the terms “individuals”, “groups”, or “parties” are often used interchangeably with no regard to the circumstances on how many people or entities are involved in the negotiation theories to be discussed.
Negotiation theory is an interdisciplinary field that has been developed by economists, sociologists, and psychologists, and offers prescriptions for effective negotiating (Arvanitis and Karampatzos, 2011). Introspectively I would theorize that like individual’s negotiation strategy or style is much like any other personality trait in that it is inherent, and little subject to change over the long-term. However, most importantly, I have no mental reservations to conclude that negotiation skills and theories can be learned and practiced to broaden ones abilities and inherent traits. Individuals whose primary focus is centered on outcome-based goals, based on their limited willingness or ability to broaden the perception of their negotiation strategy, would mainly concentrate on the final results of the negotiation (Katz-Navon and Goldschmidt, 2009). I believe this strategy has a tremendous amount of utility when you want to subconsciously lead the opposing party to believe this is your primary negotiation strategy. However, I believe this covert strategy to be effective only if one enters the negotiation with the most power. When
Dr. Gayle Pohl
COM 665
14 March 2014
Negotiation Strategies and Theories
Most of us envision negotiations as a form of conflict where the outcome is typically one winner and one loser (or winning and losing party/group). Because both parties engaging in negotiations have something to achieve, people tend to enter negotiations emphasizing outcome and/or process goals (Katz-Navon and Goldschmidt, 2009). Differences in status, power, and gender all play highly significant roles (often times subconsciously or inadvertently) and will be discussed further analyzed in this paper. As somewhat of a disclaimer, the terms “individuals”, “groups”, or “parties” are often used interchangeably with no regard to the circumstances on how many people or entities are involved in the negotiation theories to be discussed.
Negotiation theory is an interdisciplinary field that has been developed by economists, sociologists, and psychologists, and offers prescriptions for effective negotiating (Arvanitis and Karampatzos, 2011). Introspectively I would theorize that like individual’s negotiation strategy or style is much like any other personality trait in that it is inherent, and little subject to change over the long-term. However, most importantly, I have no mental reservations to conclude that negotiation skills and theories can be learned and practiced to broaden ones abilities and inherent traits. Individuals whose primary focus is centered on outcome-based goals, based on their limited willingness or ability to broaden the perception of their negotiation strategy, would mainly concentrate on the final results of the negotiation (Katz-Navon and Goldschmidt, 2009). I believe this strategy has a tremendous amount of utility when you want to subconsciously lead the opposing party to believe this is your primary negotiation strategy. However, I believe this covert strategy to be effective only if one enters the negotiation with the most power. When
Cited: Arvantis, Alexios and Karampatzos, Antonis. Negotiation and Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Truth over interests? Philosophical Psychology Vol 24 (6) pp 845-860. December 2011. Web. 13 March 2014. Bowles, Hannah Riley ; Babcock, Linda ; Mcginn, Kathleen L. Dovidio, Constraints and triggers: Situational mechanics of gender in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2009, Vol.89(6), pp.951-965. 13 March 2014. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273. 1988. Web. 12 March 2014. Harrison, Lisa A and Lynch, Amanda B. Social Role Theory and the Perceived Gender Role Orientation of Athletes. Sex Roles. Vol 52 pp 227-236. 2009. Web. 13 March 2014. Katz-Navon, Tal Y. and Goldschmidt, Chanan. Goal oriendations in negotiations: The influence of goal orientations on fixed-pie perceptions and bargaining outcomes. International Journal of Psychology. , 44 (1) 60-70. 2009. Web. 13 March 2014. Malhotra, Deepak and Gino, Francesca. The Pursuit of Power Corrupts: How Investing in Outside Options Motivates Opportunism in Relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly. 2011. Web. 13 March 2014. Stuhlmacher, Alice F. Gender Differences in Virtual Negotiation: Theory and Research. Springer Science and Business Media. 3 July 2007. Web. 12 March 2014. Ebsco Host. Walters, A. E., Stuhlmacher, A. F., & Meyer, L. L. Gender and negotiator competitiveness: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76,1 –29. 1998. Web. 12 March 2014.