CHAPTER 3 Strategy and Tactics of Integrative Negotiation 一体化（整合型）谈判 (expanding the pie 增大蛋糕) Approach: a comparative view
Learning Objective • Understand the relationship btwn Strategy & Tactics • Remember and internalize the distinctive features of Integrative Negotiation, in comparison with those of Distributive Bargaining • Develop the awareness of and capacity to applying the fundamentals of Integrative Negotiation for better outcomes of negotiation, including creating value, developing alternatives and applying objective criteria at the value-claiming stage.
Outline Strategy & Tactics Integrative vs Distributive: Case illustrations Q&A exercise: Salary Negotiation Pair Work Case Studies Assignment: Discussion Questions
1 Strategy and Tactics • Strategy (thought): overall guideline, indicating the direction we need to take from our wishes and needs to our objectives. • Tactics (its formulation): a concrete line of action following after strategy. • The thought comes before the word.
2 Integrative vs Distributive Warming-up Questions • Do you believe in IN? • Can you name some differences btwn IN & DN? • Why is the distinction in btwn so important?
Why is the distinction in btwn so important? If you want to play well, you need to know the rules of the game. The Negotiators’ mental models are central to understanding how the negotiation game is defined. How parties understand the game is a critical determinant of how they play the game.
2 …Case illustrations • Case illustrations
Remarks on case 1: Distributive • focus on one single issue (often, money). • Conflict dominated and relationship ignored or sacrificed. • Myth: negotiation as a fixed pie perception. • Possible outcomes: win-lose, lose-lose (compromise), no agreement • Often common for one-off, low-value deals, e.g. buying items at a flea market where haggling is the accepted “game.” • Inefficient (a battle of will) AND ……?
Case 2 Two men were quarrelling in a library. One wants the window open and the other wants it closed. They argue back and forth about how much to leave it open: a crack, halfway, three quarters of the way. No solution satisfies them both. The librarian enters. She askswhy he wants the window open: “To get some fresh air.” She asks the other why he wants it closed: “To avoid the draft.” After thinking a minute, she opens wide a window in the next room, bringing in fresh air without a draft.
Case 2 Integrative • win-win perception: both can win. • problem-solving, cooperative: focus on mutual interests (e.g. “care about”, “want”), and a potential script: What can I learn from this demand? (vs. How can I avoid accepting this demand?) • Multiple issues and multiple options: A position is just one possible option or a possible solution (e.g. a crack, halfway, three quarters of the way). • positions not identical to interests • Asking questions of “why” and “why not” can help explore interests behind positions (e.g. “To get some fresh air.” “to avoid the draft.”)
Distributive Negotiation 1. little cooperation 2. what I gain is what you lose 3. win-lose Integrative Negotiation 1. strong cooperation 2. mutual gain 3. win-win
2 …Win-win revolution Popularized by the book Getting to Yes. Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Fisher, Ury, and Patton in the early 1980s.(1981, 1991, 1995) The focus shifted from battling over the division of the pie to the means of expanding it by uncovering and reconciling underlying interests. Principled Negotiation: Four key contributions (TBCed)
Principled Negotiation people interests options criteria
Principled negotiation： 4D dig Options Criteria decide design Interests BATNA develop
2 …IN as a six-step procedure 1. State what you want. 2. Express how you feel. 3. Give the reasons that underlie your wants and feelings. 4. Communicate your understanding of the other person’s wants, feelings, and reasons. 5. Invent three or more possible solutions that enhance everyone’s outcomes. 6. Agree and shake hands on the solution that maximizes mutual benefits.
Classic Case-Scenario 1 • Two kids are squabbling over the last orange in the fridge. When Dad hears the ruckus, he goes into the kitchen and is sure he’s got the answer. He slices the fruit into equal halves and gives one to each kid. Surprising, no one is happy. Why? Because one kid just wanted the pulp, and the other just wanted the rind.
Classic case---Scenario 2 Recently two of my sons were squabbling over some apple pie, each insisting that he would have the larger slice. Neither would agree to an even split. So I suggested that one boy cut the pie any way he liked, and the other boy could choose the piece he wanted. This sounded fair to both of them, and they accepted. Each felt that he had gotten the square deal.
2. …Learning focus Integrative negotiation is more appropriate for Business Negotiation and International Negotiation. YES! Then, What challenges? What are your concerns?.... Complexity & a myriad of Questions remain to be explored and answered (TBCed)
Questions to be explored • Is there a propensity for integrative tactics to be reciprocated? • Is the reciprocation of integrative tactics related to the quality of the negotiated outcome? • Does the relationship btwn outcomes and the integrative tactics hold, irrespective of the social value orientation of the dyad, or do dyads of different kinds achieve high-quality outcomes in different ways? • …..
3 Q&A exercise: Salary Negotiation • Question and answer? Distributive or Integrative?
Salary Negotiation • Recruiter: There are four aspects that actually go together. There is the number of years of contract and the vacation, the removal can be separated out from the package. So if, if we keep the package at six thousand for you and we have 60% removal costs, that would be additional. • Applicant: No I'd need more than 60% I was thinking 80% actually. • Recruiter: What if we kept it at 60% and upped it to $8000 for the package?
Applicant: I just want to get clear in my head about the vacation. Like I said I'm not prepared to relocate to Canberra unless I get more than the two weeks. • Recruiter: Well it depends how many years you're with us. The shorter the time that you were with us, I would expect the less time you would get in vacation. If you were going to be with us for six years say you'd get three weeks holiday. • Applicant: I would be prepared to go to Canberra for six years only for six weeks vacation.
Applicant: I think it's a good starting point. It obviously needs some work. My contract can be longer than four years; I think that's negotiable. Canberra if it's really important to you. • Recruiter: The thing with Canberra is that we' ve got three positions there. How open are you to challenge in new areas? Because we recognize that your strategic skills are applicable across any broad range and you have demonstrated very high levels of achievement in the strategic areas. We're not looking at the strategic abilities in HR, we're looking at your strategic abilities as a separate set of skills and you've already demonstrated those abilities in HR to a very high degree, which is why you are sitting here having this conversation with me. We'd like to take those skills and apply them to a new area.
Recruiter: So if we were to do say three weeks vacation, how many years contract would you agree on? • Applicant: Perhaps if we get back to the package. I'd be prepared to go to Canberra for 6 years, if that's important to you. . . • Recruiter: Well that's related into vacation, and I know vacation's important to you because of family commitments. So we could even look at four years and three weeks vacation each year for that time and include the airfares in an $8000 package with 60% removal costs on top of that.
4. Pair work: Problem-solving task Direction: Please jointly work out a solution and report to the class. THE CASE Suppose that you are the seller and your partner is the purchaser. The seller’s position is stated as selling a certain number of sewing machines at X dollars per unit whereas the purchaser’s position is expressed as receiving a certain number of sewing machines within a month’s time at X minus $30 dollars per unit.
6. Assignment Case study: Geely&Volvo Merger e.g. China's lucky man bags Volvo. Economist, 00130613, 8/7/2010, 册 396, 发行 8694 • 数据库: Business Source Complete • www.sdu.edu.cn • Ebscohost • Geely may be ready to take a run at Volvo. Automotive News, 00051551, 9/28/2009, 册 84, 发行 6379 • Geely's market share of passenger vehicles in China, 2005-2009
6. ---Discussion Questions 1. What are some conditions that may be conducive to achieving integrative agreements? 2. What can you do to bring about these conditions? 3. What kinds of processes (or communications) are most likely to produce integrative agreements? Are different processes called for under such different circumstances as relatively simple or complex negotiations? 4. How might you encourage an opponent to resist making concessions without risking the possibility of an impasse?
The Titles • Introduction. • An Overview of the Integrative Negotiation (IN) Process. • Key Steps in the IN. • Factors that Facilitate Successful IN. • Why IN is Difficult to Achieve. • Chapter Summary.
1. Introduction (p.71) • The fundamental structure of an IN situation allows both sides to achieve theirobjectives. Then, questions to explore in this chapter: What is the fundamental structure of IN? How to go about it (What are the rules of the game)? What are our efforts directed towards? What tactics are amenable to successful IN? ……
What makes IN Different? For a negotiation to be characterized as integrative, negotiators must also: (p.71) • Focus on commonalities rather than differences • Attempt to address needs and interests, not positions. • Commit to meeting the needs of all involved parties • Exchange information and ideas • Invent options for mutual gain (creativity) • Use objective criteria for standards of performance
2. An Overview of the Integrative Negotiation Process (p.72) • Creating a Free Flow of Information. • Attempting to Understand the Other Negotiator’s Real Needs and Objectives. • Emphasizing the Commonalities between the Parties and Minimizing the Differences. • Searching for Solutions That Meet the Needs and Objectives of Both Sides.
3. Key Steps in the IN process There are major steps in the IN process (p.75): • Identify and Define the Problem. • Understand the Problem Fully—Identify Interests and Needs. • Generate Alternative Solutions. • Evaluate and Select Alternatives.
3. Key Steps in the IN process • Figure 3.1 Creating and Claiming Value主张价值and the Pareto Efficient Frontier（p.75) 帕累托 Increasing Value to Buyer Claiming Value Pareto efficient frontier Creating Value Increasing Value to Seller
3.1 Identify and Define the Problem（pp.75-8) • Define the problem in a way That is Mutually Acceptable to both sides. • State the Problem with an Eye toward Practicality and Comprehensiveness. • State the Problem as a Goal and Identify the Obstacles to Attaining This Goal. • Depersonalize the Problem. • Separate the Problem Definition from the Search for Solutions.
Define the problem in a way That is Mutually Acceptable to both sides (p.76)
State the Problem with an Eye toward Practicality and Comprehensiveness
State the Problem as a Goal and Identify the Obstacles to Attaining This Goal