Negotiation. An A‐Z Guide

Citation

María González Tirados, R. (2010), "Negotiation. An A‐Z Guide", Management Decision, Vol. 48 No. 6, pp. 1023-1027. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741011053523

Gavin Kennedy's A‐Z guide to negotiation published this year (2009) begins with an introductory essay on how negotiation has developed throughout time and aims to provide a summary of the task of negotiation.

As Gavin Kennedy (2009) himself points out, almost every aspect of business ‐and of human life‐ involves the ability to negotiate. Without the right kind of negotiation it would be difficult to solve questions such as organising a team to work on a project, asking for a pay‐rise or deciding simple issues like who is going to do the shopping or the housework. This Guidebook sets out to provide a set of useful negotiating skills that can mark all the difference between success and failure in negotiation.

In the second part of this book, the author presents us with a set of concepts that will become the ABC of negotiation. The author has made a compilation of the main terms used in any negotiating context and has defined them in alphabetical order.

Although the preface is brief, the author offers some highly interesting reflections on negotiation. He criticises labelling or stereotyping people because of their personality or place of origin, etc, when sitting down at the negotiating table.

Regarding what the author means by the development of negotiation over time, in the first part, (pp 2 a 12) Gavin Kennedy alludes to negotiation understood as a social transaction between humans and points out that this has a long history that has gradually developed in parallel to the evolution of our society. Its origin can be situated about 11,000 years ago with the first populations of hunter‐gatherers. The agricultural “revolution” created the conditions for the appearance of the first towns, a result of landowners joining together for protection. This new society of traders, craftsmen and merchants formed the origin of trade in Europe.

Afterwards, with the advent of the industrial “revolution”, according to the author, markets matured on scales until then unknown. Manufacturing and a division of labour on an increasingly global scale brought negotiation to a more refined and complex form. The first negotiations were perceived as an exchange between neighbouring populations, and the use of diplomacy for political negotiation between States that had different systems of justice. Little by little negotiations in this period gradually reached hitherto unseen levels of refinement.

In spite of all this progress, the essence of all negotiation is a successful outcome to the conditional offer. The author quotes Adam Smith (1976): “Give me that which I want and you shall have that which you want”. This describes traditional negotiation: the process by which we seek to obtain what we want from someone who wants something of ours. As Gavin Kennedy (2009) points out, our predecessors discovered this after a long trial period and as a result of the learning passed on by their descendents.

To a certain extent, globalisation has brought new variants in the form of local “cultural” attitudes, although much of what passes for local culture is often based on fragile national stereotypes. The author describes the different ways of negotiating used by some nations and states that some nationalities, such as the Japanese, Chinese and Arabs prefer to establish personal relations first and then move on to business. Americans negotiate too fast; Italians, Greeks and Spaniards prefer to take their time and are always late; Germans and Scandinavians are very formal when negotiating; Dutch and Danish speak several languages; the British are too serious; and the French, says the author, are “French”. These are opinions which are really nothing more than labels.

These are simply stereotypes and patently mistaken, since basing negotiation on an investigation of local customs and the place where the possible negotiators were born may be one way of bringing together a whole lot of characteristics to undermine the assertions of those stereotypes. For example, a Belgian may be Flemish or Walloon, a British citizen from Scotland or England, an American from Louisiana or Brooklyn. All these differences of origin may be important, as may whether they were educated at one university or another or are self‐made men or women.

This does not mean that cultural differences are not important. However, the key factor in negotiation is knowing when to speak and when to remain silent; when to say “maybe” and when to say “no”; when to ask a question and when and what to answer and above all, knowing when to prepare – before the meeting and not during it.

Another point the author deals with in his book concerning negotiation is personality. According to Gavin Kennedy (p. 5) many theoretical distractions are offered to potential negotiators, among which is the introduction of psychological and personality analyses.

In this regard, the author has serious doubts as to whether personality influences behaviour in negotiation. There is no way to analyse, identify and give an immediate response to the personality of the person with whom we are negotiating, particularly if we have not met or negotiated with this person previously. It is difficult to get to know a person's personality and even more so in the short time that a negotiation lasts.

With these thoughts the author understands that when the personality of the other negotiator is known, and we thus know what we need to do, it is usually too late to apply this knowledge at the time of negotiation. Unlike personality, which may be hidden, we can never know what people are thinking. However, behaviour cannot be hidden as it is manifest and visible.

People can hide their attitudes and beliefs but they cannot easily hide their behaviour when seated at the negotiating table. Behaviour, such as moving slowly, arguing every slight detail or being opposed to the different alternatives put forward or refusing to see the best possibilities of a good negotiation, are just some of the aspects that force us to consider our negotiating options before making rapid decisions that will be later regretted.

Many attempts have been made to “improve” negotiating behaviours that vary from manipulation by means of ploys and tricks to “winning” through deception, intimidation and other strategies that might even lead to changing the principles of the negotiation.

As the author rightly states, it is best to avoid deception when negotiating as it might be discovered and then you will lose all the respect of your partners. Therefore, as Roger Fisher and Bill Ury state, it is preferable to request a change in the way negotiations are being conducted and in behaviour. This may be because they are both being lawyers and are familiar with the US court system where they could see similarities in the behaviour of lawyers who refuse to make any concession in any claim on behalf of their clients even if this means costly, lengthy litigation, and negotiators who refuse to budge from their position unless the other party surrenders to their demands. This behaviour is called “positional bargaining”, the motto being “It's my deal or nothing”. However, Gavin Kennedy maintains that the problem with this behaviour is that it is not a negotiation but an ultimatum. He holds the view that negotiation is an exchange of conditional propositions – “If you give me some of what I want, then I shall give you some of what you want.”

Another predominant principle in negotiation is the use of a third party to act as an external mediator. These mediators often broker satisfactory agreements in difficult circumstances, particularly in multiparty negotiations where there are several stake holders.

Finally, the author introduces us to the four phases of every negotiation. The first is the preparation phase, and as its name indicates, this is the phase for researching all the information required for the negotiation. With the information platforms currently at our disposal – like the internet‐ no negotiator has any excuse for sitting down with a potential client without knowing anything about them.

The other three stages are debate or exploration followed by a mixture of proposing and bargaining, and finally an agreement or deadlock. It should be pointed out that these three phases are rarely sequential.

On many occasions the parties are not aware that they are preparing a negotiation. The negotiators simply attend a meeting which may not be a prelude to a negotiation. These meetings could be interpreted as a debate although the participants do nothing more than exchange points of view. On other occasions the meeting might be to present a report but could turn out to be a negotiation without warning. It could also be that somebody makes a suggestion about how a specific problem could be dealt with and this sometimes quickly changes to the negotiation of a specific suggestion.

The process may also provide its own feedback; for example, if during the exchange of proposals the persons attending the negotiation ask for more time before making a decision (going back to phase one or the preparation phase) or by asking more questions (phase two of the debate). Another example of feedback would be somebody asking questions or making comments or suggestions that would involve going back to the debate phase.

The importance of knowing the negotiation phase lies in the fact that the negotiators can adapt their behaviours to that phase and avoid behaviours that are inappropriate.

As a conclusion to this first chapter the main point to remember is that proper preparation for the negotiation “is the hallmark of an effective negotiator” (John Benson). The time spent preparing a negotiation is never time wasted.

Nowadays, access to information for preparing a negotiation is unlimited and being a bad professional is the only excuse for not being prepared. As Cicero put it, “ex praeparato, nil desperandum”, that is, if you are prepared, you have nothing to worry about.

Pages 15 to 265 deal with concepts used in negotiation and are presented in alphabetical order from A to Z as a dictionary of terms. The author finds between 8 and 12 terms that refer to negotiating and the concepts to be put into practice by every negotiator in the negotiation process. As the author states, (p. 2) he does not expect the existing negotiating process to change much in the foreseeable future, which leads us to understand that these concepts are fully operative in the business context.

Considering the extensive scope of the concepts described in this guide, which Gavin Kennedy calls the A to Z, we shall look at some of the concepts that are linked to the philosophy the author wishes to reflect in any negotiating “process”.

One example is “Negotiating language”. According to the author (p. 149) various types of language are recommended for negotiating. For example, the term “we need” is more forceful language and expresses more energy than if we say “we would like”, so we are more likely to attract greater attention depending on the negotiating language we use. Energetic language would use “I need, I must, I want, I insist, etc.”, while weaker language would use “I would like, I hope, I would appreciate, I feel, etc.”, which are less imperative terms expressing a desideratum.

On page 187 Gavin Kennedy (2009) presents the term “Problem solving”. The term is also used for solving learning problems and in decision‐making and trouble‐shooting. The term demands trust between the parties and confidentiality in each of the issues to be dealt with. Attempting to solve a dispute unilaterally exposes us to a strategic interaction by the other negotiators if they use a competitive style.

The goal of the mediators in a problem is:

• •

  to maximise joint outcomes;

• •

  to focus common interests but not differences;

• •

  not to be conflictive and not to judge; and

• •

  to apply standards of “common sense” and “what is reasonable”.

Another term listed under “P” is “Proposal”. It is pointed out that this is the only term that can be negotiated (p. 190) “I'm going to make a proposal”. A person cannot negotiate an argument, a belief, an opinion, a prejudice, a principle, an expectation, a formal complaint or a fact, but something we propose to others can be negotiated. In general, proposals create a situation that facilitates choice:

• •

  A proposal is a provisional solution that is pending a final choice.

• •

  A bargain is a specific conditional offer to be resolved.

• •

  Before proposing something it is better to reveal the conditions first and then choose the proposal.

• •

  If the conditions are not accepted, they will not enjoy the benefits of the offer.

The author clarifies that a proposal reveals information on a range of agreement, it being impossible to propose and simultaneously hide an offer. The fact that a proposal is specific concerning what we want to do or receive means that it is vague as to what we would get in exchange.

Gavin Kennedy mentions (p. 220) the term “Strategy”, maintaining it is the best word for keeping a strategy simple, since strategies that are too complex can fail at any time as a result of the other negotiators not having understood the explanation of what is considered a strategy.

A strategy depends on diverse circumstances and on the issues under negotiation. It is recommended not to mention money as it could be a strategic objective when the value of what is being sold is unknown. A strategy is usually put forward as a negotiating method; for example, “He used various strategies to convince him of the advisability of something”, etc.

Gavin Kennedy's book is highly interesting and contains an array of terms that are all very useful and interesting for comment and analysis on executive training and negotiating courses. It can serve as a “Vade mecum” when explaining negotiation techniques to Human Resources, providing the precise meaning of every term.

In spite of its 265 pages it is a profound book that gives itself over to a deep reflection on every term and its meaning. It can be used in the area of Economic and Business Sciences as well as in Organisational Psychology and is particularly useful for training trainers, executives, etc. In addition to explaining the meanings of many terms used in negotiating as well as pointing out the road to success for both the parties seeking agreements with the negotiation, it will also serve to develop skills that contribute to successful negotiations.

The book ends with a ten page appendix on negotiation training companies. Specialised trainers and consultants and also some useful recommendations on the most important aspects of negotiation.

About the authors

Rosa María González‐Tirados has a PhD in Psychology and is Professor of Human Resources at Madrid Polytechnic University. She is the Director of a University Teacher Training Centre. She has many publications, some books and papers with varying contents and has also undertaken different works of research. She has designed many activities for Executive and University Teaching Staff Training and for different Master's courses.