Uploaded byvannagoforth
DOCX, PDF71 views

NEGOTIATIONSEVENTH EDITION• ROY J. LEWICKI • DAVID M.docx

The document discusses the strategies and tactics of distributive bargaining, emphasizing the need for negotiators to understand the nature of negotiation, interdependence, and the importance of resistance points. It highlights that successful negotiation requires setting clear target points, managing perceptions, and making appropriate concessions. Additionally, it addresses the complexities of conflict and the different types of interdependence that affect negotiation outcomes.

Embed presentation

Download to read offline
NEGOTIATION SEVENTH EDITION • ROY J. LEWICKI • DAVID M. SAUNDERS • BRUCE BARRY Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-1 Chapter 2 STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING 1-1 Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-2
THREE REASONS NEGOTIATORS SHOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING 1. Independent situations require knowing how this works in order to do well 2. Need to know how to counter the effects of the strategies 3. Every situation has the potential to require skills at the “claiming-value” stage Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-3 THE DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING SITUATION • Goals of one party are in fundamental, direct conflict to another party • Resources are fixed and limited • Maximizing one’s own share of resources is the goal for both parties Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
2-4 THE DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING SITUATION Preparation—set a • Target point, aspiration point • Walkaway, resistance point • Asking price, initial offer Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-5 THE DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING SITUATION Party B - Buyer Party A - Seller Walkaway Point Target Point Asking Price Initial Offer Target Point Walkaway Point Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or
distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-6 THE ROLE OF ALTERNATIVES TO A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT • Alternatives give the negotiator power to walk away from the negotiation Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-7 THE DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING SITUATION Party B - Buyer Party A - Seller Walkaway Point Target Point Asking Price
Initial Offer Target Point Walkaway Point Alternative Alternative Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-8 FUNDAMENTAL STRATEGIES • Push for settlement near opponent’s resistance point • Get the other party to change their resistance point • If settlement range is negative, either: • Convince the other party that the settlement is the best possible Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill
Education. 2-9 KEYS TO THE STRATEGIES The keys to implementing any of the four strategies are: • Discovering the other party’s resistance point • Influencing the other party’s resistance point Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-10 FOUR PROPOSITIONS THAT SUGGEST HOW THE KEYS AFFECT THE PROCESS 1. The higher the other party’s estimate of your cost of delay or impasse, the stronger the other party’s resistance point will be. 2. The higher the other party’s estimate of his or her own cost of delay or impasse, the weaker the other party’s resistance point will be. Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or
distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-11 FOUR PROPOSITIONS THAT SUGGEST HOW THE KEYS AFFECT THE PROCESS 3. The less the other party values an issue, the lower their resistance point will be. 4. The more the other party believes that you value an issue, the lower their resistance point may be. Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-12 TACTICAL TASKS OF NEGOTIATORS • Assess outcome values and the costs of termination for the other party • Manage the other party’s impressions • Modify the other party’s perceptions • Manipulate the actual costs of delay or
termination Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-13 ASSESS THE OTHER PARTY’S TARGET, RESISTANCE POINT, AND COSTS OF TERMINATING NEGOTIATIONS • Indirectly • Directly Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-14
MANAGE THE OTHER PARTY’S IMPRESSIONS • Screen your behavior: • Direct action to alter impressions Present facts that enhance one’s position Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-15 MODIFY THE OTHER PARTY’S PERCEPTIONS • Make outcomes appear less attractive • Make the cost of obtaining goals appear higher • Make demands and positions appear more or less attractive to the other party – whichever suits your needs Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-16
MANIPULATE THE ACTUAL COSTS OF DELAY OR TERMINATION • Plan disruptive action • Form an alliance with outsiders influence the outcome in your favor • Schedule manipulations the other Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-17 POSITIONS TAKEN DURING NEGOTIATIONS • Opening offer • Opening stance
• Initial concessions Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-18 POSITIONS TAKEN DURING NEGOTIATIONS • The role of concessions • Patterns of concession making • Final offers (making a commitment) Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
2-19 COMMITMENTS: TACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS • Establishing a commitment ences • Preventing the other party from committing prematurely Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-20 WAYS TO CREATE A COMMITMENT • Public pronouncement • Linking with an outside base
• Increase the prominence of demands • Reinforce the threat or promise Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-21 COMMITMENTS: TACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS • Ways to abandon a committed position imize the damage to the relationship if the other backs off Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-22
CLOSING THE DEAL • Provide alternatives (2 or 3 packages) • Assume the close • Split the difference • Exploding offers • Deal sweeteners Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-23 DEALING WITH TYPICAL HARDBALL TACTICS • Four main options: -opt the other party (befriend them) Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved.
No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-24 TYPICAL HARDBALL TACTICS • Good Cop/Bad Cop • Lowball/Highball • Bogey (playing up an issue of little importance) • The Nibble (asking for a number of small concessions to) Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-25 TYPICAL HARDBALL TACTICS • Chicken • Intimidation • Aggressive Behavior
• Snow Job (overwhelm the other party with information) Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-26 SUMMARY Negotiators need to: • Set a clear target and resistance points • Understand and work to improve their BATNA • Start with good opening offer • Make appropriate concessions • Manage the commitment process Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-27
NEGOTIATION SEVENTH EDITION • ROY J. LEWICKI • DAVID M. SAUNDERS • BRUCE BARRY Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 1‐1 NEGOTIATION 7e Lewicki ▪ Saunders ▪ Barry Chapter 1 THE NATURE OF NEGOTIATION 1‐2 Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw- Hill Education. INTRODUCTION Negotiation is something that everyone does, almost daily
1-3Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. NEGOTIATIONS Negotiations occur for several reasons: • To agree on how to share or divide a limited resource • To create something new that neither party could attain on his or her own • To resolve a problem or dispute between the parties 1-4Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. APPROACH TO THE SUBJECT Most people think bargaining and negotiation mean the same thing; however, we will be distinctive about the way we use these two words: • Bargaining: describes the competitive, win‐lose situation • Negotiation: refers to win‐win situations such as those that occur when parties try to find a
mutually acceptable solution to a complex conflict 1-5Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. THREE IMPORTANT THEMES 1. The definition of negotiation and the basic characteristics of negotiation situations 2. Interdependence, the relationship between people and groups that most often leads them to negotiate 3. Understanding the dynamics of conflict and conflict management processes which serve as a backdrop for different ways that people approach and manage negotiations 1-6Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. CHARACTERISTICS OF A NEGOTIATION SITUATION • There are two or more parties • There is a conflict of needs and desires between two or more parties
• Parties negotiate because they think they can get a better deal than by simply accepting what the other side offers them • Parties expect a “give‐and‐take” process 1-7Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. CHARACTERISTICS OF A NEGOTIATION SITUATION • Parties search for agreement rather than: openly off contact permanently their dispute to a third party • Successful negotiation involves: of tangibles (e.g., the price or the terms of agreement) tion of intangibles (the underlying psychological motivations) such as winning, losing, saving face 1-8Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 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 I win, you lose Opportunities for both parties to gain 1-9Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. INTERDEPENDENCE • 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 1-10Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. TYPES OF INTERDEPENDENCE AFFECT OUTCOMES • Interdependence and the structure of the
situation shape processes and outcomes or distributive – one winner or integrative – mutual gains situation 1-11Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 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) 1-12Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 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 1-13Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 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 1-14Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. TWO DILEMMAS IN MUTUAL ADJUSTMENT • Dilemma of honesty about how much of the truth to tell the other party • Dilemma of trust about how much should negotiators believe what the other party tells them
1-15Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. VALUE CLAIMING AND VALUE CREATION • Opportunities to “win” or share resources value: result of zero‐sum or distributive situations where the object is to gain largest piece of resource value: result of non‐zero‐sum or integrative situation where the object is to have both parties do well 1-16Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. VALUE CLAIMING AND VALUE CREATION • Most actual negotiations are a combination of claiming and creating value processes must be able to recognize situations that require more of one approach than the other 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 1-17Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights
reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. VALUE CLAIMING AND VALUE CREATION Value differences that exist between negotiators include: • Differences in interest • Differences in judgments about the future • Differences in risk tolerance • Differences in time preferences 1-18Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. CONFLICT Conflict may be defined as a: "sharp disagreement or opposition" and includes "the perceived divergence of interest, or a belief that the parties' current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously" 1-19Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
LEVELS OF CONFLICT • Intrapersonal or intrapsychic conflict that occurs within an individual want an ice cream cone badly, but we know that ice cream is very fattening • Interpersonal conflict onflict is between individuals between bosses and subordinates, spouses, siblings, roommates, etc. 1-20Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. LEVELS OF CONFLICT • Intragroup Conflict is within a group team and committee members, within families, classes etc. • Intergroup Conflict can occur between organizations, warring nations, feuding families, or within splintered, fragmented communities negotiations are the most complex 1-21Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
DYSFUNCTIONS OF CONFLICT 1. Competitive, win‐lose goals 2. Misperception and bias 3. Emotionality 4. Decreased communication 5. Blurred issues 6. Rigid commitments 7. Magnified differences, minimized similarities 8. Escalation of conflict 1-22Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. FUNCTIONS OF CONFLICT 1. Makes organizational members more aware and able to cope with problems through discussion. 2. Promises organizational change and adaptation. 3. Strengthens relationships and heightens morale. 4. Promotes awareness of self and others. 5. Enhances personal development. 6. Encourages psychological development—it helps people become more accurate and realistic in their self‐appraisals. 7. Can be stimulating and fun.
1-23Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. THE DUAL CONCERNS MODEL 1-24Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. STYLES OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT 1. Contending pursue own outcomes strongly, show little concern for other party obtaining their desired outcomes 2. Yielding show little interest in whether they attain own outcomes, but are quite interested in whether the other party attains their outcomes 3. Inaction show little interest in whether they attain own outcomes, and little concern about whether the other party obtains their outcomes 1-25Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
STYLES OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT 4. Problem solving show high concern in obtaining own outcomes, as well as high concern for the other party obtaining their outcomes 5. Compromising show moderate concern in obtaining own outcomes, as well as moderate concern for the other party obtaining their outcomes 1-26Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. NEGOTIATING STYLE SELF-ASSESSMENT The purpose of this self-assessment is to help you examine your personal negotiating style. Negotiation – a process by which two parties communicate with each other in order to reach an outcome on which they mutually agree. Directions 1. PRINT THIS SELF-ASSESSMENT OUT! 2. Read the definition of negotiation above to make sure that you understand it. 3. Answer all questions to the best of your ability. There are no right or wrong answers. Don’t try to think of the “correct” or most “desirable” response, but simply respond with your honest
reactions. 4. Respond by putting a check-mark or X in one column per question or statement. 5. Proceed to the second page where you will find a number of questions that ask you to consider how likely or unlikely you are to behave in a certain way when you are negotiating. 6. On the third page you are required to rate your level of agreement with a number of statements. 7. Proceed to the fourth page where you will find the scoring key and interpretation guide. How likely are you to do each of the following when NEGOTIATING? Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely 1. I’ll come up with a plan so that I can steer the negotiation to go my way. 2. I’ll do things expressly to make sure that the negotiation stays friendly and comfortable.
3. I’ll go out of my way to make sure that the outcome for the other person is fair. 4. I’ll do things so that both of us can get what we want from the negotiation. 5. If something needs to be negotiated, I’ll immediately step forward to do it. 6. I’ll give some in order to get some from the person I’m negotiating with. 7. If the negotiation is not going my way, I’ll bail out of the negotiation.
8. I’ll suggest creative solutions that allow both of us to get what we want from the negotiation. 9. If it seems important for the other person to come out on top, I’ll give in to them. 10. I’ll avoid difficult issues to keep the negotiation from getting nasty. 11. If the other person compromises their position, I’ll compromise my position in return. 12. I’ll make sure that both of our needs are understood so that both of us can come out on top.
13. I’ll present information, when negotiating, even if it doesn’t necessarily always support my position. 14. I’ll propose a place in the middle where we both can meet. 15. I’ll try to see things from the other person’s viewpoint and be considerate of their needs. Rate your level of agreement with each of these statements. Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree
Strongly Disagree 16. In every negotiation, both sides have to give something up to get something in return. 17. What’s good for me is really all that matters when negotiating. 18. I’ll do almost anything to keep from having to engage in negotiation. 19. In negotiating, someone wins and someone has to lose. 20. The feelings of the other person that I’m negotiating with are important to me. 21. Negotiation works better when the focus is on common
agreement rather than differences. 22. I can be aggressive when it comes to getting my way from a negotiation. 23. When you compromise in a negotiation, you really just lose. 24. If the other person gets a “raw deal” from our negotiation, that really doesn’t matter to me. 25. Keeping the comfort level high is very important to me when I’m negotiating. NEGOTIATING STYLE
SELF-ASSESSMENT – Interpretation Guide I. Background It is important that you, the student, review the discussion of collective bargaining behavior in Chapter 6 of Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 8th edition, before continuing. Holley, Jennings, & Wolters identify two distinct and very different approaches to bargaining. Distributive Bargaining approaches negotiation as a win-lose exercise where the gains of one party must come at the expense of the other party. The sole focus of the negotiator is to maximize his/her own outcomes. In the negotiation literature, this orientation is referred to as Assertiveness. Mutual Gain Bargaining approaches negotiation as a mutual problem-solving exercise. Relying on open communication, trust, and mutual respect, negotiators focus on fulfilling the mutual interests of both parties. In the negotiation literature, this orientation is referred to as Cooperativeness. Negotiators that exhibit Assertiveness tendencies are more likely to engage in Distributive Bargaining behavior while negotiators that are high in Cooperativeness are more likely to use a Mutual Gain Bargaining approach. Thus, this self- assessment will help you examine your levels of Assertiveness versus Cooperativeness. According to the negotiation literature, the measurement of Assertiveness and Cooperativeness requires the consideration of five distinct negotiation styles. The five negotiation styles are: Competing - Negotiators that exhibit this style are results- oriented, self-confident, assertive, are focused primarily on the bottom line, have a tendency to impose their views upon the
other party, and in the extreme can become aggressive and domineering. This style is high in Assertiveness and low in Cooperativeness. Avoiding - Negotiators that exhibit this style are passive, prefer to avoid conflict, make attempts to withdraw from the situation or pass responsibility onto another party, and fail to show adequate concern or make an honest attempt to get to a solution. This style is both low in Assertiveness and low in Cooperativeness. Collaborating - Negotiators that exhibit this style use open and honest communication, focus on finding creative solutions that mutually satisfy both parties, are open to exploring new and novel solutions, and suggest many alternatives for consideration. This style is both high in Assertiveness and high in Cooperativeness. Accommodating – Negotiators that exhibit this style make attempts to maintain relationships with the other party, smooth over conflicts, downplay differences, and are most concerned with satisfying the needs of the other party. This style is low in Assertiveness but high in Cooperativeness. Compromising – Negotiators that exhibit this style aim to find the middle ground, often split the difference between positions, frequently engage in give and take tradeoffs, and accept moderate satisfaction of both parties’ needs. This style is both moderate in Assertiveness and moderate in Cooperativeness. Figure 1 displays the relationship between these five negotiating styles and the competing dimensions of Assertiveness versus Cooperativeness. Figure 1 High
Competing Collaborating Assertiveness Distributive Bargaining Compromising Low Avoiding AccommodatingLow Cooperativeness Mutual Gain BargainingHigh II. Competing Style Part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Neither Likely nor Unlikely” column for question #1, you would enter a score of 3 next to Q1. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely
Very Likely Q1: 1 2 3 4 5 Q7: 1 2 3 4 5 Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q13: 5 4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q17: 5 4 3 2 1 Q22: 5 4 3 2 1 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 18 OR ABOVE HIGH ON COMPETING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. 16 TO 17 MODERATE TO HIGH ON COMPETING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style.
14 TO 15 MODERATE TO LOW ON COMPETING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. 13 OR BELOW LOW ON COMPETING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. III. Avoiding Style This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Likely” column for question #2, you would enter a score of 4 next to Q2. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely
Very Likely Q2: 1 2 3 4 5 Q10: 1 2 3 4 5 Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q5: 5 4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree Agree
Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q18: 5 4 3 2 1 Q25: 5 4 3 2 1 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 18 OR ABOVE HIGH ON AVOIDING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. 16 TO 17 MODERATE TO HIGH ON AVOIDING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style.
14 TO 15 MODERATE TO LOW ON AVOIDING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. 13 OR BELOW LOW ON AVOIDING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. IV. Collaborating Style This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Unlikely” column for question #4, you would enter a score of 2 next to Q4. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q4: 1
2 3 4 5 Q8: 1 2 3 4 5 Q12: 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q19: 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q21: 5 4 3 2 1 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 21 OR ABOVE HIGH ON COLLABORATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. 19 TO 20 MODERATE TO HIGH ON COLLABORATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. 17 TO 18 MODERATE TO LOW ON COLLABORATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in
the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. 16 OR BELOW LOW ON COLLABORATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. V. Accommodating Style This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Very Unlikely” column for question #3, you would enter a score of 1 next to Q3. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q3: 1
2 3 4 5 Q9: 1 2 3 4 5 Q15: 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q20: 5 4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q24: 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 19 OR ABOVE HIGH ON ACCOMMODATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. 17 TO 18 MODERATE TO HIGH ON ACCOMMODATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. 15 TO 16 MODERATE TO LOW ON ACCOMMODATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in
the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. 14 OR BELOW LOW ON ACCOMMODATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. VI. Compromising Style This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Very Likely” column for question #6, you would enter a score of 5 next to Q6. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q6: 1
2 3 4 5 Q11: 1 2 3 4 5 Q14: 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q16: 5 4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree
Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q23: 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 20 OR ABOVE HIGH ON COMPROMISING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. 18 TO 19 MODERATE TO HIGH ON COMPROMISING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. 16 TO 17 MODERATE TO LOW ON COMPROMISING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This
indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. 15 OR BELOW LOW ON COMPROMISING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. VII. Assertiveness Index Now that you know each of your negotiation style total scores, it is possible to determine your level of Assertiveness. The formula is as follows: Assertiveness Index = (Competing Style Total Score + Collaborating Style Total Score) - (Avoiding Style Total Score + Accommodating Style Total Score) ASSERTIVENESS INDEXINTERPRETATION 5 OR ABOVE HIGH ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. 1 TO 4 MODERATE TO HIGH ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness.
-2 TO 0 MODERATE TO LOW ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. -3 OR BELOW LOW ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. VIII. Cooperativeness Index Likewise, it is also possible to determine your level of Cooperativeness. The formula is as follows: Cooperativeness Index = (Collaborating Style Total Score + Accommodating Style Total Score) - (Competing Style Total Score + Avoiding Style Total Score) COOPERATIVENESS INDEXINTERPRETATION 9 OR ABOVE HIGH ON COOPERATIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness. 5 TO 8 MODERATE TO HIGH ON COOPERATIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent
with Cooperativeness. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness. 2 TO 4 MODERATE TO LOW ON COOPERATIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness. 1 OR BELOW LOW ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness.

More Related Content

PPT
Chap002
byDoc Syl
 
PPTX
Negotiation Lewecki Ch 2 Distributive Negotiations [sav lecture]
byFan DiFu, Ph.D. (Steve)
 
PPTX
Strategy and Tactics of Distrtibutive Negotiation [Sav Lecture]
byFan DiFu, Ph.D. (Steve)
 
PPT
Negotiation
byPIREH
 
PDF
Negotiation 7th Edition Lewicki Test Bank
byzmhmcljt427
 
PDF
Negotiation 7th Edition Lewicki Test Bank
byyijwmmho8373
 
PPTX
02 Strategy and Tactics of Distributive Bargaining.pptx
byNguyenhanoi5
 
PPT
Negotiationslides 130422231644-phpapp01
byphanarinc
 
Chap002
byDoc Syl
 
Negotiation Lewecki Ch 2 Distributive Negotiations [sav lecture]
byFan DiFu, Ph.D. (Steve)
 
Strategy and Tactics of Distrtibutive Negotiation [Sav Lecture]
byFan DiFu, Ph.D. (Steve)
 
Negotiation
byPIREH
 
Negotiation 7th Edition Lewicki Test Bank
byzmhmcljt427
 
Negotiation 7th Edition Lewicki Test Bank
byyijwmmho8373
 
02 Strategy and Tactics of Distributive Bargaining.pptx
byNguyenhanoi5
 
Negotiationslides 130422231644-phpapp01
byphanarinc
 

Similar to NEGOTIATIONSEVENTH EDITION• ROY J. LEWICKI • DAVID M.docx

PDF
Negotiation skills
byPrashant Dedhia
 
PPTX
Lewicki_EON_2024Rel_Chap04_PPT_ACCESS (2).pptx
bydtmaxxtt
 
PPTX
NEGOTIATION
byRahul Tiwari
 
PDF
ppt-140102000449-phpapp02.pdf
byEkram Bin Mamun
 
PPT
Week_3_4_ppts
byihsangorgun
 
TXT
Negotiation
byashutosh5290
 
TXT
Negotiation5
byashutosh5290
 
PPT
Ch 04 - Negotiation Strategy and Planning.ppt
byjkk7zfrnck
 
PDF
(eBook PDF) Essentials of Negotiation 5th Edition by Roy Lewicki
bycoreneeticha
 
PPT
The final negotiation
byRikkyo University
 
PPT
Strategy & Tactics of Distributive Bargaining
byAceones
 
PPTX
Unit4 International Negotiation
byzuleidaramirez
 
PPTX
The Art of Negotiation
byZakaria Laroussi
 
PDF
Strategic Negotiation Tools and Tactics
byNow Dentons
 
PPT
Negotiation PowerPoint PPT Content Modern Sample
byAndrew Schwartz
 
PDF
Secret Powers of Negotiations Summary PDF
byDan Walker
 
PDF
Essentials of Negotiation, 6e - Solutions Manual 6th Edition Roy J. Lewicki
bytuznarooks
 
PPT
Negotiation Skills Updated
byMahmoud
 
PPT
Win Win Negotiations
byMaxwell Ranasinghe
 
PPTX
Negotiation in the field of business.pptx
byJamakala Obaiah
 
Negotiation skills
byPrashant Dedhia
 
Lewicki_EON_2024Rel_Chap04_PPT_ACCESS (2).pptx
bydtmaxxtt
 
NEGOTIATION
byRahul Tiwari
 
ppt-140102000449-phpapp02.pdf
byEkram Bin Mamun
 
Week_3_4_ppts
byihsangorgun
 
Negotiation
byashutosh5290
 
Negotiation5
byashutosh5290
 
Ch 04 - Negotiation Strategy and Planning.ppt
byjkk7zfrnck
 
(eBook PDF) Essentials of Negotiation 5th Edition by Roy Lewicki
bycoreneeticha
 
The final negotiation
byRikkyo University
 
Strategy & Tactics of Distributive Bargaining
byAceones
 
Unit4 International Negotiation
byzuleidaramirez
 
The Art of Negotiation
byZakaria Laroussi
 
Strategic Negotiation Tools and Tactics
byNow Dentons
 
Negotiation PowerPoint PPT Content Modern Sample
byAndrew Schwartz
 
Secret Powers of Negotiations Summary PDF
byDan Walker
 
Essentials of Negotiation, 6e - Solutions Manual 6th Edition Roy J. Lewicki
bytuznarooks
 
Negotiation Skills Updated
byMahmoud
 
Win Win Negotiations
byMaxwell Ranasinghe
 
Negotiation in the field of business.pptx
byJamakala Obaiah
 

More from vannagoforth

DOCX
1. Primary sources2. Secondary sources3. La Malinche4. Bacon’s.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Prepare an outline, an introduction, and a summary.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Normative moral philosophy typically focuses on the determining t.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Paper should be 5-pages min. + 1 page works cited2. Should have.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Name and describe the three steps of the looking-glass self.2.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Provide an example of a business or specific person(s) that effec.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Mexico and Guatemala. Research the political and economic situati.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Many scholars have set some standards to judge a system for taxat.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. List and (in 1-2 sentences) describe the 4 interlocking factors t.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Please explain how the Constitution provides for a system of sepa.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Please watch the following The Diving Bell & The Butterfly, Amel.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Most sociologists interpret social life from one of the three maj.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Members of one species cannot successfully interbreed and produc.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Of the three chemical bonds discussed in class, which of them is .docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Look at your diagrams for hydrogen, lithium, and sodium. What do .docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Name the following molecules2. Sketch the following molecules.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. List the horizontal and vertical levels of systems that exist in .docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. Kemal Ataturk carried out policies that distanced the new Turkish.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. If we consider a gallon of gas as having 100 units of energy, and.docx
byvannagoforth
 
DOCX
1. In 200-250 words, analyze the basic issues of human biology as th.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Primary sources2. Secondary sources3. La Malinche4. Bacon’s.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Prepare an outline, an introduction, and a summary.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Normative moral philosophy typically focuses on the determining t.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Paper should be 5-pages min. + 1 page works cited2. Should have.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Name and describe the three steps of the looking-glass self.2.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Provide an example of a business or specific person(s) that effec.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Mexico and Guatemala. Research the political and economic situati.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Many scholars have set some standards to judge a system for taxat.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. List and (in 1-2 sentences) describe the 4 interlocking factors t.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Please explain how the Constitution provides for a system of sepa.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Please watch the following The Diving Bell & The Butterfly, Amel.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Most sociologists interpret social life from one of the three maj.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Members of one species cannot successfully interbreed and produc.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Of the three chemical bonds discussed in class, which of them is .docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Look at your diagrams for hydrogen, lithium, and sodium. What do .docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Name the following molecules2. Sketch the following molecules.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. List the horizontal and vertical levels of systems that exist in .docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. Kemal Ataturk carried out policies that distanced the new Turkish.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. If we consider a gallon of gas as having 100 units of energy, and.docx
byvannagoforth
 
1. In 200-250 words, analyze the basic issues of human biology as th.docx
byvannagoforth
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
NAVIGATE PHARMACY CAREER OPPORTUNITIES.pdf
byMd. Zakaria Faruki
 
PPTX
The Art Pastor's Guide to the Liturgical Calendar
bySteve Thomason
 
PDF
Nutrients & Role in Horticulture.pdf, Dr. Sharad Bisen Horticulture
bybisensharad
 
PPTX
Introduction to Sampling Methods :Basic Concept
byvetri339874
 
PDF
Types of Vegetable Gardens, College of Agriculture Balaghat.pdf
bybisensharad
 
PPTX
Transforming Learning Experiences by Personalisation of Education - George Ub...
byEADTU
 
PDF
Projecte de la porta de la classe de primer A: Mar i cel.
byeduardrubio1
 
PDF
The Drift Principle: When Information Accelerates Faster Than Minds Can Compress
byReality Drift Archive
 
PDF
Constipation.pdf
byAlakesh
 
PPTX
Details of Muscular-and-Nervous-Tissues.pptx
byAshish Umale
 
PPTX
Cost of Capital - Cost of Equity, Cost of debenture, Cost of Preference share...
bySundar B N
 
PPTX
How to Automate Quality Checks in Odoo 18 Quality App
byCeline George
 
PPTX
Parts of speech Nouns, Pronouns, Verbs, Adverbs etc.pptx
byFarhan Amjad Gondal
 
PPTX
AsiaSweep 2025 Questions Only--FINAL .ppt
byArul Mani
 
PDF
Projecte de la porta d'i5B: Els animals marins
byeduardrubio1
 
PPTX
Rectal Surgery in Senior Citiizens .pptx
byJohn Thanakumar
 
PPTX
Role of the Uninstall Hook in Odoo 18 Module Cleanup
byCeline George
 
PDF
Models of Teaching - TNTEU - B.Ed I Semester - Teaching and Learning - BD1TL ...
byDr Raja Mohammed T
 
PDF
FAMILY ASSESSMENT FORMAT - CHN practical
byDr. Sudhadevi Sadanandan
 
PDF
Blue / Green: Troop Leading Procedure (TLP) Overview.pdf
byBlue / Green Training
 
NAVIGATE PHARMACY CAREER OPPORTUNITIES.pdf
byMd. Zakaria Faruki
 
The Art Pastor's Guide to the Liturgical Calendar
bySteve Thomason
 
Nutrients & Role in Horticulture.pdf, Dr. Sharad Bisen Horticulture
bybisensharad
 
Introduction to Sampling Methods :Basic Concept
byvetri339874
 
Types of Vegetable Gardens, College of Agriculture Balaghat.pdf
bybisensharad
 
Transforming Learning Experiences by Personalisation of Education - George Ub...
byEADTU
 
Projecte de la porta de la classe de primer A: Mar i cel.
byeduardrubio1
 
The Drift Principle: When Information Accelerates Faster Than Minds Can Compress
byReality Drift Archive
 
Constipation.pdf
byAlakesh
 
Details of Muscular-and-Nervous-Tissues.pptx
byAshish Umale
 
Cost of Capital - Cost of Equity, Cost of debenture, Cost of Preference share...
bySundar B N
 
How to Automate Quality Checks in Odoo 18 Quality App
byCeline George
 
Parts of speech Nouns, Pronouns, Verbs, Adverbs etc.pptx
byFarhan Amjad Gondal
 
AsiaSweep 2025 Questions Only--FINAL .ppt
byArul Mani
 
Projecte de la porta d'i5B: Els animals marins
byeduardrubio1
 
Rectal Surgery in Senior Citiizens .pptx
byJohn Thanakumar
 
Role of the Uninstall Hook in Odoo 18 Module Cleanup
byCeline George
 
Models of Teaching - TNTEU - B.Ed I Semester - Teaching and Learning - BD1TL ...
byDr Raja Mohammed T
 
FAMILY ASSESSMENT FORMAT - CHN practical
byDr. Sudhadevi Sadanandan
 
Blue / Green: Troop Leading Procedure (TLP) Overview.pdf
byBlue / Green Training
 

NEGOTIATIONSEVENTH EDITION• ROY J. LEWICKI • DAVID M.docx

  • 1.
    NEGOTIATION SEVENTH EDITION • ROYJ. LEWICKI • DAVID M. SAUNDERS • BRUCE BARRY Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-1 Chapter 2 STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING 1-1 Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-2
  • 2.
    THREE REASONS NEGOTIATORSSHOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING 1. Independent situations require knowing how this works in order to do well 2. Need to know how to counter the effects of the strategies 3. Every situation has the potential to require skills at the “claiming-value” stage Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-3 THE DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING SITUATION • Goals of one party are in fundamental, direct conflict to another party • Resources are fixed and limited • Maximizing one’s own share of resources is the goal for both parties Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
  • 3.
    2-4 THE DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAININGSITUATION Preparation—set a • Target point, aspiration point • Walkaway, resistance point • Asking price, initial offer Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-5 THE DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING SITUATION Party B - Buyer Party A - Seller Walkaway Point Target Point Asking Price Initial Offer Target Point Walkaway Point Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or
  • 4.
    distribution without theprior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-6 THE ROLE OF ALTERNATIVES TO A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT • Alternatives give the negotiator power to walk away from the negotiation Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-7 THE DISTRIBUTIVE BARGAINING SITUATION Party B - Buyer Party A - Seller Walkaway Point Target Point Asking Price
  • 5.
    Initial Offer TargetPoint Walkaway Point Alternative Alternative Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-8 FUNDAMENTAL STRATEGIES • Push for settlement near opponent’s resistance point • Get the other party to change their resistance point • If settlement range is negative, either: • Convince the other party that the settlement is the best possible Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill
  • 6.
    Education. 2-9 KEYS TO THESTRATEGIES The keys to implementing any of the four strategies are: • Discovering the other party’s resistance point • Influencing the other party’s resistance point Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-10 FOUR PROPOSITIONS THAT SUGGEST HOW THE KEYS AFFECT THE PROCESS 1. The higher the other party’s estimate of your cost of delay or impasse, the stronger the other party’s resistance point will be. 2. The higher the other party’s estimate of his or her own cost of delay or impasse, the weaker the other party’s resistance point will be. Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or
  • 7.
    distribution without theprior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-11 FOUR PROPOSITIONS THAT SUGGEST HOW THE KEYS AFFECT THE PROCESS 3. The less the other party values an issue, the lower their resistance point will be. 4. The more the other party believes that you value an issue, the lower their resistance point may be. Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-12 TACTICAL TASKS OF NEGOTIATORS • Assess outcome values and the costs of termination for the other party • Manage the other party’s impressions • Modify the other party’s perceptions • Manipulate the actual costs of delay or
  • 8.
    termination Copyright © 2015McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-13 ASSESS THE OTHER PARTY’S TARGET, RESISTANCE POINT, AND COSTS OF TERMINATING NEGOTIATIONS • Indirectly • Directly Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-14
  • 9.
    MANAGE THE OTHERPARTY’S IMPRESSIONS • Screen your behavior: • Direct action to alter impressions Present facts that enhance one’s position Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-15 MODIFY THE OTHER PARTY’S PERCEPTIONS • Make outcomes appear less attractive • Make the cost of obtaining goals appear higher • Make demands and positions appear more or less attractive to the other party – whichever suits your needs Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-16
  • 10.
    MANIPULATE THE ACTUALCOSTS OF DELAY OR TERMINATION • Plan disruptive action • Form an alliance with outsiders influence the outcome in your favor • Schedule manipulations the other Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-17 POSITIONS TAKEN DURING NEGOTIATIONS • Opening offer • Opening stance
  • 11.
    • Initial concessions Copyright© 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-18 POSITIONS TAKEN DURING NEGOTIATIONS • The role of concessions • Patterns of concession making • Final offers (making a commitment) Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
  • 12.
    2-19 COMMITMENTS: TACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS • Establishinga commitment ences • Preventing the other party from committing prematurely Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-20 WAYS TO CREATE A COMMITMENT • Public pronouncement • Linking with an outside base
  • 13.
    • Increase theprominence of demands • Reinforce the threat or promise Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-21 COMMITMENTS: TACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS • Ways to abandon a committed position imize the damage to the relationship if the other backs off Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-22
  • 14.
    CLOSING THE DEAL •Provide alternatives (2 or 3 packages) • Assume the close • Split the difference • Exploding offers • Deal sweeteners Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-23 DEALING WITH TYPICAL HARDBALL TACTICS • Four main options: -opt the other party (befriend them) Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved.
  • 15.
    No reproduction or distributionwithout the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-24 TYPICAL HARDBALL TACTICS • Good Cop/Bad Cop • Lowball/Highball • Bogey (playing up an issue of little importance) • The Nibble (asking for a number of small concessions to) Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-25 TYPICAL HARDBALL TACTICS • Chicken • Intimidation • Aggressive Behavior
  • 16.
    • Snow Job(overwhelm the other party with information) Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-26 SUMMARY Negotiators need to: • Set a clear target and resistance points • Understand and work to improve their BATNA • Start with good opening offer • Make appropriate concessions • Manage the commitment process Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 2-27
  • 17.
    NEGOTIATION SEVENTH EDITION • ROYJ. LEWICKI • DAVID M. SAUNDERS • BRUCE BARRY Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 1‐1 NEGOTIATION 7e Lewicki ▪ Saunders ▪ Barry Chapter 1 THE NATURE OF NEGOTIATION 1‐2 Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw- Hill Education. INTRODUCTION Negotiation is something that everyone does, almost daily
  • 18.
    1-3Copyright © 2015McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. NEGOTIATIONS Negotiations occur for several reasons: • To agree on how to share or divide a limited resource • To create something new that neither party could attain on his or her own • To resolve a problem or dispute between the parties 1-4Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. APPROACH TO THE SUBJECT Most people think bargaining and negotiation mean the same thing; however, we will be distinctive about the way we use these two words: • Bargaining: describes the competitive, win‐lose situation • Negotiation: refers to win‐win situations such as those that occur when parties try to find a
  • 19.
    mutually acceptable solutionto a complex conflict 1-5Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. THREE IMPORTANT THEMES 1. The definition of negotiation and the basic characteristics of negotiation situations 2. Interdependence, the relationship between people and groups that most often leads them to negotiate 3. Understanding the dynamics of conflict and conflict management processes which serve as a backdrop for different ways that people approach and manage negotiations 1-6Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. CHARACTERISTICS OF A NEGOTIATION SITUATION • There are two or more parties • There is a conflict of needs and desires between two or more parties
  • 20.
    • Parties negotiatebecause they think they can get a better deal than by simply accepting what the other side offers them • Parties expect a “give‐and‐take” process 1-7Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. CHARACTERISTICS OF A NEGOTIATION SITUATION • Parties search for agreement rather than: openly off contact permanently their dispute to a third party • Successful negotiation involves: of tangibles (e.g., the price or the terms of agreement) tion of intangibles (the underlying psychological motivations) such as winning, losing, saving face 1-8Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. INTERDEPENDENCE In negotiation, parties need each other to achieve their preferred outcomes or objectives.
  • 21.
    • This mutualdependency is called interdependence • Interdependent goals are an important aspect of negotiation I win, you lose Opportunities for both parties to gain 1-9Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. INTERDEPENDENCE • 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 1-10Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. TYPES OF INTERDEPENDENCE AFFECT OUTCOMES • Interdependence and the structure of the
  • 22.
    situation shape processesand outcomes or distributive – one winner or integrative – mutual gains situation 1-11Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 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) 1-12Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 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
  • 23.
    how people willadjust and readjust and how the negotiations might twist and turn, based on one’s own moves and the other’s responses 1-13Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. 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 1-14Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. TWO DILEMMAS IN MUTUAL ADJUSTMENT • Dilemma of honesty about how much of the truth to tell the other party • Dilemma of trust about how much should negotiators believe what the other party tells them
  • 24.
    1-15Copyright © 2015McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. VALUE CLAIMING AND VALUE CREATION • Opportunities to “win” or share resources value: result of zero‐sum or distributive situations where the object is to gain largest piece of resource value: result of non‐zero‐sum or integrative situation where the object is to have both parties do well 1-16Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. VALUE CLAIMING AND VALUE CREATION • Most actual negotiations are a combination of claiming and creating value processes must be able to recognize situations that require more of one approach than the other 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 1-17Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights
  • 25.
    reserved. No reproductionor distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. VALUE CLAIMING AND VALUE CREATION Value differences that exist between negotiators include: • Differences in interest • Differences in judgments about the future • Differences in risk tolerance • Differences in time preferences 1-18Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. CONFLICT Conflict may be defined as a: "sharp disagreement or opposition" and includes "the perceived divergence of interest, or a belief that the parties' current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously" 1-19Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
  • 26.
    LEVELS OF CONFLICT •Intrapersonal or intrapsychic conflict that occurs within an individual want an ice cream cone badly, but we know that ice cream is very fattening • Interpersonal conflict onflict is between individuals between bosses and subordinates, spouses, siblings, roommates, etc. 1-20Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. LEVELS OF CONFLICT • Intragroup Conflict is within a group team and committee members, within families, classes etc. • Intergroup Conflict can occur between organizations, warring nations, feuding families, or within splintered, fragmented communities negotiations are the most complex 1-21Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
  • 27.
    DYSFUNCTIONS OF CONFLICT 1.Competitive, win‐lose goals 2. Misperception and bias 3. Emotionality 4. Decreased communication 5. Blurred issues 6. Rigid commitments 7. Magnified differences, minimized similarities 8. Escalation of conflict 1-22Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. FUNCTIONS OF CONFLICT 1. Makes organizational members more aware and able to cope with problems through discussion. 2. Promises organizational change and adaptation. 3. Strengthens relationships and heightens morale. 4. Promotes awareness of self and others. 5. Enhances personal development. 6. Encourages psychological development—it helps people become more accurate and realistic in their self‐appraisals. 7. Can be stimulating and fun.
  • 28.
    1-23Copyright © 2015McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. THE DUAL CONCERNS MODEL 1-24Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. STYLES OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT 1. Contending pursue own outcomes strongly, show little concern for other party obtaining their desired outcomes 2. Yielding show little interest in whether they attain own outcomes, but are quite interested in whether the other party attains their outcomes 3. Inaction show little interest in whether they attain own outcomes, and little concern about whether the other party obtains their outcomes 1-25Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
  • 29.
    STYLES OF CONFLICTMANAGEMENT 4. Problem solving show high concern in obtaining own outcomes, as well as high concern for the other party obtaining their outcomes 5. Compromising show moderate concern in obtaining own outcomes, as well as moderate concern for the other party obtaining their outcomes 1-26Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education. NEGOTIATING STYLE SELF-ASSESSMENT The purpose of this self-assessment is to help you examine your personal negotiating style. Negotiation – a process by which two parties communicate with each other in order to reach an outcome on which they mutually agree. Directions 1. PRINT THIS SELF-ASSESSMENT OUT! 2. Read the definition of negotiation above to make sure that you understand it. 3. Answer all questions to the best of your ability. There are no right or wrong answers. Don’t try to think of the “correct” or most “desirable” response, but simply respond with your honest
  • 30.
    reactions. 4. Respond byputting a check-mark or X in one column per question or statement. 5. Proceed to the second page where you will find a number of questions that ask you to consider how likely or unlikely you are to behave in a certain way when you are negotiating. 6. On the third page you are required to rate your level of agreement with a number of statements. 7. Proceed to the fourth page where you will find the scoring key and interpretation guide. How likely are you to do each of the following when NEGOTIATING? Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely 1. I’ll come up with a plan so that I can steer the negotiation to go my way. 2. I’ll do things expressly to make sure that the negotiation stays friendly and comfortable.
  • 31.
    3. I’ll goout of my way to make sure that the outcome for the other person is fair. 4. I’ll do things so that both of us can get what we want from the negotiation. 5. If something needs to be negotiated, I’ll immediately step forward to do it. 6. I’ll give some in order to get some from the person I’m negotiating with. 7. If the negotiation is not going my way, I’ll bail out of the negotiation.
  • 32.
    8. I’ll suggestcreative solutions that allow both of us to get what we want from the negotiation. 9. If it seems important for the other person to come out on top, I’ll give in to them. 10. I’ll avoid difficult issues to keep the negotiation from getting nasty. 11. If the other person compromises their position, I’ll compromise my position in return. 12. I’ll make sure that both of our needs are understood so that both of us can come out on top.
  • 33.
    13. I’ll presentinformation, when negotiating, even if it doesn’t necessarily always support my position. 14. I’ll propose a place in the middle where we both can meet. 15. I’ll try to see things from the other person’s viewpoint and be considerate of their needs. Rate your level of agreement with each of these statements. Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree
  • 34.
    Strongly Disagree 16. Inevery negotiation, both sides have to give something up to get something in return. 17. What’s good for me is really all that matters when negotiating. 18. I’ll do almost anything to keep from having to engage in negotiation. 19. In negotiating, someone wins and someone has to lose. 20. The feelings of the other person that I’m negotiating with are important to me. 21. Negotiation works better when the focus is on common
  • 35.
    agreement rather thandifferences. 22. I can be aggressive when it comes to getting my way from a negotiation. 23. When you compromise in a negotiation, you really just lose. 24. If the other person gets a “raw deal” from our negotiation, that really doesn’t matter to me. 25. Keeping the comfort level high is very important to me when I’m negotiating. NEGOTIATING STYLE
  • 36.
    SELF-ASSESSMENT – InterpretationGuide I. Background It is important that you, the student, review the discussion of collective bargaining behavior in Chapter 6 of Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 8th edition, before continuing. Holley, Jennings, & Wolters identify two distinct and very different approaches to bargaining. Distributive Bargaining approaches negotiation as a win-lose exercise where the gains of one party must come at the expense of the other party. The sole focus of the negotiator is to maximize his/her own outcomes. In the negotiation literature, this orientation is referred to as Assertiveness. Mutual Gain Bargaining approaches negotiation as a mutual problem-solving exercise. Relying on open communication, trust, and mutual respect, negotiators focus on fulfilling the mutual interests of both parties. In the negotiation literature, this orientation is referred to as Cooperativeness. Negotiators that exhibit Assertiveness tendencies are more likely to engage in Distributive Bargaining behavior while negotiators that are high in Cooperativeness are more likely to use a Mutual Gain Bargaining approach. Thus, this self- assessment will help you examine your levels of Assertiveness versus Cooperativeness. According to the negotiation literature, the measurement of Assertiveness and Cooperativeness requires the consideration of five distinct negotiation styles. The five negotiation styles are: Competing - Negotiators that exhibit this style are results- oriented, self-confident, assertive, are focused primarily on the bottom line, have a tendency to impose their views upon the
  • 37.
    other party, andin the extreme can become aggressive and domineering. This style is high in Assertiveness and low in Cooperativeness. Avoiding - Negotiators that exhibit this style are passive, prefer to avoid conflict, make attempts to withdraw from the situation or pass responsibility onto another party, and fail to show adequate concern or make an honest attempt to get to a solution. This style is both low in Assertiveness and low in Cooperativeness. Collaborating - Negotiators that exhibit this style use open and honest communication, focus on finding creative solutions that mutually satisfy both parties, are open to exploring new and novel solutions, and suggest many alternatives for consideration. This style is both high in Assertiveness and high in Cooperativeness. Accommodating – Negotiators that exhibit this style make attempts to maintain relationships with the other party, smooth over conflicts, downplay differences, and are most concerned with satisfying the needs of the other party. This style is low in Assertiveness but high in Cooperativeness. Compromising – Negotiators that exhibit this style aim to find the middle ground, often split the difference between positions, frequently engage in give and take tradeoffs, and accept moderate satisfaction of both parties’ needs. This style is both moderate in Assertiveness and moderate in Cooperativeness. Figure 1 displays the relationship between these five negotiating styles and the competing dimensions of Assertiveness versus Cooperativeness. Figure 1 High
  • 38.
    Competing Collaborating Assertiveness Distributive Bargaining Compromising Low Avoiding AccommodatingLow Cooperativeness MutualGain BargainingHigh II. Competing Style Part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Neither Likely nor Unlikely” column for question #1, you would enter a score of 3 next to Q1. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely
  • 39.
    Very Likely Q1: 1 2 3 4 5 Q7: 1 2 3 4 5 Very Unlikely Unlikely NeitherLikely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q13: 5 4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree
  • 40.
    Agree Neither Agree norDisagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q17: 5 4 3 2 1 Q22: 5 4 3 2 1 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 18 OR ABOVE HIGH ON COMPETING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. 16 TO 17 MODERATE TO HIGH ON COMPETING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style.
  • 41.
    14 TO 15 MODERATETO LOW ON COMPETING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. 13 OR BELOW LOW ON COMPETING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Competing style. III. Avoiding Style This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Likely” column for question #2, you would enter a score of 4 next to Q2. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely
  • 42.
    Very Likely Q2: 1 2 3 4 5 Q10: 1 2 3 4 5 Very Unlikely Unlikely NeitherLikely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q5: 5 4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree Agree
  • 43.
    Neither Agree norDisagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q18: 5 4 3 2 1 Q25: 5 4 3 2 1 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 18 OR ABOVE HIGH ON AVOIDING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. 16 TO 17 MODERATE TO HIGH ON AVOIDING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style.
  • 44.
    14 TO 15 MODERATETO LOW ON AVOIDING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. 13 OR BELOW LOW ON AVOIDING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Avoiding style. IV. Collaborating Style This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Unlikely” column for question #4, you would enter a score of 2 next to Q4. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q4: 1
  • 45.
    2 3 4 5 Q8: 1 2 3 4 5 Q12: 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agreenor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q19: 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree
  • 46.
    Agree Neither Agree norDisagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q21: 5 4 3 2 1 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 21 OR ABOVE HIGH ON COLLABORATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. 19 TO 20 MODERATE TO HIGH ON COLLABORATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. 17 TO 18 MODERATE TO LOW ON COLLABORATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in
  • 47.
    the second quartile(i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. 16 OR BELOW LOW ON COLLABORATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Collaborating style. V. Accommodating Style This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Very Unlikely” column for question #3, you would enter a score of 1 next to Q3. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q3: 1
  • 48.
    2 3 4 5 Q9: 1 2 3 4 5 Q15: 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agreenor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q20: 5 4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree
  • 49.
    Agree Neither Agree norDisagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q24: 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 19 OR ABOVE HIGH ON ACCOMMODATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. 17 TO 18 MODERATE TO HIGH ON ACCOMMODATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. 15 TO 16 MODERATE TO LOW ON ACCOMMODATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in
  • 50.
    the second quartile(i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. 14 OR BELOW LOW ON ACCOMMODATING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Accommodating style. VI. Compromising Style This part of the self-assessment measures the degree to which you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising negotiating style. In the table below, find the numerical score that corresponds to the column that you checked for each question. Enter that number to the left of the table for each question. For example, if you checked the “Very Likely” column for question #6, you would enter a score of 5 next to Q6. QUESTIONSCORE Very Unlikely Unlikely Neither Likely nor Unlikely Likely Very Likely Q6: 1
  • 51.
    2 3 4 5 Q11: 1 2 3 4 5 Q14: 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agreenor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q16: 5 4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree
  • 52.
    Agree Neither Agree norDisagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Q23: 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL: (Add all scores) TOTAL SCOREINTERPRETATION 20 OR ABOVE HIGH ON COMPROMISING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. 18 TO 19 MODERATE TO HIGH ON COMPROMISING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. 16 TO 17 MODERATE TO LOW ON COMPROMISING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This
  • 53.
    indicates that youmoderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. 15 OR BELOW LOW ON COMPROMISING STYLE – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with the Compromising style. VII. Assertiveness Index Now that you know each of your negotiation style total scores, it is possible to determine your level of Assertiveness. The formula is as follows: Assertiveness Index = (Competing Style Total Score + Collaborating Style Total Score) - (Avoiding Style Total Score + Accommodating Style Total Score) ASSERTIVENESS INDEXINTERPRETATION 5 OR ABOVE HIGH ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. 1 TO 4 MODERATE TO HIGH ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. The higher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness.
  • 54.
    -2 TO 0 MODERATETO LOW ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. -3 OR BELOW LOW ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with Assertiveness. VIII. Cooperativeness Index Likewise, it is also possible to determine your level of Cooperativeness. The formula is as follows: Cooperativeness Index = (Collaborating Style Total Score + Accommodating Style Total Score) - (Competing Style Total Score + Avoiding Style Total Score) COOPERATIVENESS INDEXINTERPRETATION 9 OR ABOVE HIGH ON COOPERATIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the top/fourth quartile (i.e., top 25%) of scores. This indicates that you strongly exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness. 5 TO 8 MODERATE TO HIGH ON COOPERATIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the third quartile (i.e., between 50%-75%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to strongly exhibit characteristics consistent
  • 55.
    with Cooperativeness. Thehigher your score is, the more strongly you exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness. 2 TO 4 MODERATE TO LOW ON COOPERATIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the second quartile (i.e., between 25%-50%) of scores. This indicates that you moderately to weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness. The lower your score is, the more weakly you exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness. 1 OR BELOW LOW ON ASSERTIVENESS – Compared to a national sample of students, your score falls in the bottom/first quartile (i.e., bottom 25%) of scores. This indicates that you only weakly exhibit characteristics consistent with Cooperativeness.