CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATION GLEON Fellowship Program August 2013 Workshop

Based on Getting to Yes by Fisher, Ury, and Patton of the Harvard Negotiation Project

Today’s talk and tomorrow’s discussion Introduce traditional bargaining: positional negotiation Outline an alternative strategy: principled negotiation Example-based Tuesday: academic case studies

We negotiate every day… With a friend about where to go to dinner With a supervisor about a deadline With your landlord about the terms of your lease

The Problem Positional negotiation Positional bargaining involves successively taking- and then giving up- positions Shopkeeper example

The Problem Positional negotiation Soft: Make concessions on position to preserve relationship Hard: Insist on position at the cost of the relationship

When was the last time you engaged in hard bargaining and/or soft bargaining?

Hard bargaining May produce unwise outcomes Inefficient Endangers ongoing relationships Ineffective for multiple party disputes Risk of losing face or getting locked into stated position Soft bargaining More efficient Vulnerable to hard bargainers The major problem in many negotiations is that people assume positions as either hard or soft bargainers The Problem Positional negotiation

The Method Principled negotiation Fisher, Ury, and Patton suggest it is possible to be soft on the people and hard on the problem People: Separate the people from the problem Interests: Focus on interests, not positions Options: Invent multiple options looking for mutual gains before deciding what to do Criteria: Insist that the result be based on some objective standard

Separate the people from the problem Recognize that emotions and egos can become entangled with the problem in negotiations. These can adversely affect your ability to see the other party's position clearly. Union example Clarify perceptions Pay attention to core concerns Recognize and legitimize emotions Communicate clearly Listen first to understand, then speak to be understood

Separate the people from the problem Many emotional responses are driven by ‘core concerns’ Autonomy: the desire to make your own choices and control your own fate Appreciation: the desire to be recognized and valued Affiliation: the desire to belong as an accepted member of some peer group Role: the desire to have a meaningful purpose Status: the desire to feel fairly seen and acknowledged Ignoring these concerns can generate strong negative emotions

Focus on interests, not positions Explore the true interests underlying the positions of each side, rather than a focus on the superficial positions with which parties come to the table. The initial positions presented may obscure what the parties really want. Tenant-landlady example Ask questions to explore interests Talk about your own interests

Invent options for mutual gain Parties set aside time together to generate alternative candidate solutions. The idea is that parties contribute together creatively to generate possibilities for mutual gain (a ‘win-win’ agreement). This step involves: Brainstorming Broadening options Looking for mutual gain Making their decision easy

Obstacles to inventing options Premature judgment Creativity can be difficult when under scrutiny and immediate judgment The fear that inventing options may reveal information that may jeopardize your bargaining position may limit creativity

Obstacles to inventing options Searching for the single answer People often try to create solutions that narrow the gap between positions, rather than broadening options available “I’ll pay $200” “$250 is the best deal I can offer” Options need not lie on a single dimension Racing to the single answer may cut short a wiser decision making process selected from a large number of options

Obstacles to inventing options The assumption of a fixed pie Many of us often assume a ‘fixed sum’ game, assuming very limited potential outcomes Orange example

Obstacles to inventing options Solving their problem is their problem Each side is most concerned with their own immediate interests There is often a psychological reluctance to legitimize the other side’s interests because of the risk of weakening one’s own position Failure to detach from your own position will narrow your ability to come up with solutions that satisfy both parties

Prescriptions to the obstacles Separate the act of inventing options from the act of judging them Broaden options on the table rather than looking for a single answer Look through the eyes of different experts Change the scope of the agreement Search for mutual gains Dovetailing differing interests Invent ways of making the other side’s decision easy Iraqi farmer example Photo credit: Reuters

Using objective criteria Use an objective criteria for evaluating the candidate solutions. Options should be consistent with Fair standards or procedures Precedent Market value Independent third party ‘One cuts, the other chooses’ Cake example Law of the Sea example

Knowing your alternatives to negotiating If there is a large power imbalance, you may feel destined to be on the losing end of the deal You may be pressured into accepting an outcome that is not beneficial to you You may be too committed to reaching an agreement E.g., you have invested a lot of time negotiating a deal  Know your best alternative to negotiated agreement (BATNA)

Knowing your alternatives The reason you negotiate is to produce something better than the results you can obtain without negotiating Selling the house example Knowing you BATNA will allow you to weigh potential outcomes against your alternatives

Knowing your alternatives Sharing your BATNA with the other side may strengthen your bargaining power Knowing the other side’s BATNA will allow you to have realistic expectations for the negotiation

Generating a BATNA Invent a list of actions you may take if no agreement is reached Improve the promising ideas and convert them into practical alternatives Select the alternative that seems best Job offer in Chicago example

Knowing your alternatives Cautions Considering the aggregate of alternatives Salary raise example BATNAs may be more favorable than any negotiated outcome

The Method Principled negotiation Be soft on the people and hard on the problem People: Separate the people from the problem Interests: Focus on interests, not positions Options: Invent multiple options looking for mutual gains before deciding what to do Criteria: Insist that the result be based on some objective standard Know your BATNA

Based on Getting to Yes by Fisher, Ury, and Patton of the Harvard Negotiation Project

Image credit: Sacha Chua