Negotiation Techniques MIM Course 2003 Jorge Correia Jesuino Kennedy, G. (1998). The new negotiating edge: The behavioral approach for results and relationships. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Negotiation is a process of potentially opportunistic interaction by which two or more parties, with some apparent conflict, seek to do better through jointly decided action than they could otherwise.”
Lax & Sebenius (1986). The manager as negotiator . NY: Free Press.
“ We deserve a break” “ Ok, you deserve a break” “ Give me a break” “ Give me a break – or else!” “ I’ll sue to get a break” “ How can we both get a break?” “ Heads I get a break” “ Which of us deserves a break?” Source: The Negotiate Trainer’s Manual, 1996, Negotiate Ltd, Edinburgh, p.4
The red-blue continuum 10 5 0 5 10 Extreme Red Extreme Blue
Points on the continuum No. red No. blue Point on continuum 10 0 Red 10 9 1 Red 4 8 2 Red 3 7 3 Red 2 6 4 Red 1 5 5 0 4 6 Blue 1 3 7 Blue2 2 8 Blue 3 1 9 Blue 4 0 10 Blue 10
A basic (red) assumption of negotiation “ In a successful negotiation, both parties gain – but one gains more than the other.” Source: Colin Robinson (1990). Winning at Business Negotiations: A Guide to Profitable Deal Making, Kogan Page, p.33.
Extreme red attitudes “ We recognise that, far from being honest, negotiation is a web of ever more delicate lies. A skilled negotiator will appear friendly if this is the role he considers to be most effective, but will never sacrifice profit for friendship in his business dealings. He will never help unless that is the way to get what he wants and then only if it gives him more than it costs. He will never co-operate if he can avoid it, since this implies giving up something, or worse still, sharing a gain.”
Source: The Negotiate Trainer’s Manual, 1996, p.55.
Extreme blue style “ What makes Win-Win negotiators important, both socially and historically, is that, in modifying their perception of what they need to win, they have redefined what winning means. They consider not just their own goal, but the other person’s goal and the common goal. They know that negotiating is not solely a question of how much they will win, but how much the loss will afect the other person. They have no desire to live in an unstable environment of a few winners and a multitude of embittered losers. In short, they don’t have to win it all; what’s there can be shared.” Source: Tessa A. Warschaw (1981). Winning by Negotiation, McGraw-Hill, p.62.
The prisoner’s dilemma Two prisoners, Slug and Gripper, are under arrest on suspicion of having committed a major crime. They are in separate cells and cannot communicate with each other. The authorities do not have enough evidence to convict them of the crime for which they were arrested. Instead, the prosecutor speaks to each of them separately and offers them the same deal: “ If you confess to the crime and turn state’s evidence, you will go free and your former associate will receive a 10-year sentence. If you do not confess but your associate does, then he will go free and you will receive a 10-year sentence. If you both confess, you will receive 5 year each. If neither of you confesses, you will each be charged with the misdemeanour and receive a 1-year sentence.”