Negotiation happens in almost all areas of life. In the area of law, for example, an expert negotiator serves as an advocate for one of the parties and generally seeks to obtain the most favorable results possible for that party. In this process the negotiator seeks to determine the minimum outcome that the other party (or parties) wants to accept, then adjusting their requests accordingly. A “successful” negotiation in this area occurs when the negotiator can obtain all or most of the results his or her side desires, but without leading the opposing party to permanently interrupt negotiations.
Traditional negotiation is sometimes called win-lose because of the tough style of negotiators who seek to get as much as they can for their side. In the 1970s, practitioners and researchers began to develop the win-win approach to negotiation so that both parties would be satisfied by having obtained benefits. This is positive by avoiding possible future conflicts. Perhaps the best known was articulated by Roger Fisher, William Ury, and Bruce Patton in the book "Getting to YES." Negotiation as a way to solve problems.
A tool that is being used in more than 20 countries around the world to try to achieve win-win solutions in a negotiation is the one created by Dr. E. Goldratt called “The Cloud”.
Goldratt's clouds serve to define a problem and solve it through the analogy of cloud evaporation that allows you to focus on real problems, removing the haze that they usually have and that can divert attention to insubstantial things. This technique generates second-order solutions, effective and simple, bringing the parties in conflict closer together.[5].
To reach a good agreement, it is necessary to prepare before a negotiation, as well as be sure of what is going to be negotiated and never lose focus on the topic to be discussed. According to the concept of negotiation some authors say:
Robert Mnookin,[6] director of the negotiation program at Harvard, offers a framework that can be applicable in any situation where negotiation is required. His method prevents the decision about whether to negotiate or fight, or what to negotiate, from being affected by "traps", mainly emotional, that may arise. Mnookin classifies cheating into two categories: negative and positive.
Negative traps that promote rejection:.
Positive traps that promote negotiation:.
Stepehen Covey mentions four types of negotiation in his book "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People", in the fourth habit:
Tribalism involves an appeal to group identity, in which one's own side is seen as known and trusted, while the other side is an alien group that should be distrusted and not favored.
Universalism assumes that all people are essentially equal and underestimates the importance of differences produced by culture, history, and group identity.
Demonization is the tendency to see the other side as "bad," not just guilty of bad acts, but fundamentally bad in essence.
Contextual rationalization forces the businessman to allow inappropriate attitudes because they are the product of external pressures or other factors and therefore must be forgiven.
Dehumanization involves seeing the enemy as outside the moral order, less than human. This trap justifies treating the other as an object. This happens when you choose the Lose-lose option, which includes suicide, and terrorism as one of your options.
Rehabilitation and redemption involves thinking that the other person is wrong, and giving in will mean giving them a chance to do the right thing.
Moralism and the presumption of righteousness produce a tendency to see the other side as completely wrong, while one is innocent and deserving.
The zero-sum trap involves viewing the world as a competition: if one side wins, the other loses. Conflict is seen as merely distributive: anything that benefits your enemy is necessarily bad for you.
Win-win, as a trap, assumes that it is always possible to distribute the mutiny equally in such a way that it goes well for both.
The fight or flight trap involves seemingly opposite behaviors, but both are automatic reactions. One may think of fighting without reflection or of fleeing regardless of what can be obtained.
Appeasement seeks to fix it as soon as possible to prevent the conflict from escalating and leading to undesirable consequences.
The call to battle presupposes that negotiation is a war where troops must be mobilized as soon as possible. It is usually accompanied by any other negative trap and often, although the leader maintains that the cause benefits the common good, the call to battle also suits the leader's political interests.
The call for peace is based on the premise that almost all conflict can be avoided or resolved through sensible initiatives in search of peace. This trap may involve notions of positive traps.
After removing the pitfalls, Mnookin's framework raises different questions, situated in various approaches:
1.- Interests. What are my interests? What are those of the other party?
2.- Alternatives. What are my alternatives to negotiate? What are those of the other party?
3.- Possible results of negotiating. Is there any possible deal that could better satisfy the interests of both parties than our negotiation alternatives?
4.- Costs. How much will it cost me to negotiate? What can I lose in terms of tangible resources: money and time? Will my reputation suffer? Will negotiating be a bad precedent?
5.- Implementation. If we manage to make a deal, is there a reasonable prospect that it will be carried out?
By applying this framework, you can know whether it is better to approach the other and negotiate or refuse to do so. The decision is made mainly if the results can exceed the alternatives, since, otherwise, the negotiation will not lead to any benefit for either side.
Negotiation as a skill
If we thought of negotiation as an empty box into which knowledge from different areas of management and other sciences will be poured, we will undoubtedly agree that human relations, which involve different styles and personalities, labor relations, with capitalized years of negotiation experience between employers and employees, diplomacy, with its creative solutions to political conflicts, or economics, with all its quantitative contribution through game theory, have been great forgers of the foundations present in this art.
Know and use your real power, taking into account that of the other party
The power of the parties is one of the protagonists always present in any negotiation that must be taken into account. However, you have to be cautious when recognizing it. The power of one party should not be considered by the other as something static and absolute, against which nothing can be done. On the contrary, power is always relative, given the circumstances of the negotiation, the environment that surrounds it, who and how the negotiators are, who they represent and who the influencing third parties are. such as: Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi have shared the leadership of the men's tennis circuit during the 90s. With different styles, one with a great serve and forehand on the run, the other with a great return and backhand, they create an exciting battle every time they face each other. Each is aware not only of their own sources of power, but also of those of the other. The same must happen in a negotiation, so that the result does not quickly tilt towards one of the parties.
Luzuriaga, N. Zamprile, A. and Luchi, R. (2011). The art of negotiation. Buenos Aires, Editorial Group Topics. Recovered from https://elibro.net/es/ereader/bidigeest/116692?page=28.