第9章　谈判中的各种关系因素

PAGE

Copyright©McGraw-HillEducation.Allrightsreserved.NoreproductionordistributionwithoutthepriorwrittenconsentofMcGraw-HillEducation.

Chapter9

RelationshipsinNegotiation

Overview

Inthischapter,wewillfocusonthewaysthesepastandfuturerelationshipsimpactpresentnegotiations.Ourtreatmentofrelationshipswillcomeintwomajorsections.First,weexaminehowapast,ongoing,orfuturerelationshipbetweennegotiatorsaffectsthenegotiationprocess.Thisdiscussionconsidersgeneralassumptionsthathavebeenmadeaboutthetheoryandpracticeofnegotiation—assumptionsthathavenottakenintoaccountanyrelationshipbetweentheparties—andprovidesacriticalevaluationoftheadequacyofnegotiationtheoryforunderstandingandmanagingnegotiationswithinrelationships.Wepresentataxonomyofdifferentkindsofrelationshipsandthenegotiationsthatarelikelytooccurwithinthem.Finally,weexaminethreemajordimensionsofrelationships—reputations,trust,andjustice—thatareparticularlycriticaltoaffectingnegotiationdynamics.

LearningObjectives

Understandhownegotiationwithinanexistingrelationshipchangesthenatureofnegotiationdynamics.

Explorethedifferentformsofrelationshipsinwhichnegotiationcanoccur.

Considerthecriticalrolesplayedbyreputations,trust,andfairnessinanynegotiatingrelationship.

Gaininsightintohowtorebuildtrustandrepairdamagedrelationships.

ChallengingHowRelationshipsinNegotiationHaveBeenStudied

Traditionally,researchershavestudiedthenegotiationprocessintwoways.

Onewayistostudyactualnegotiationin“live”fieldsituationssuchaslaborrelationsandinternationalrelations.

Secondly,researchershavesimulatedcomplexnegotiationsbysimplifyingthecomplexityinaresearchlaboratory.

Theycreatesimplifiednegotiatinggamesandsimulations,findundergraduateandgraduateuniversitystudentswhoarewillingtoberesearchparticipants,andtesttheeffectsofimportantinfluentialelementsundercontrolledlaboratoryconditions.

Thisapproachhasdominatedtheresearchprocessinthefieldofnegotiationforthepast50yearsforseveralreasons.

Itiseasiertoconductthistypeofresearch.

Someresearchquestionsarebestansweredundercontrolledlaboratoryconditionsasitwouldbeimpossibletoconsistentlyencountersuchconditionsinactualnegotiations—suchasthreats.

Andfinally,comparedwithfieldsituations,laboratorysettingsallowresearcherstocollectdatamoreefficiently,controlenvironmentalfactors,andbeconfidentaboutthevalidityofresults.

However,thereareseriousproblemswiththistradition.

Mostconclusionsaboutcomplexnegotiationsaredrawnfromstudiesusingsimplebargaininggamesandsimulations.

Mostnegotiatingresearchisconductedwithpartieswhohavenoexistingrelationship,whilemostactualnegotiationsoccurbetweenpeoplewitharelationshipwiththeotherparty.

Partiesmayhaveasignificantpasthistorywitheachotherandlikelyexpecttocontinuetoworktogetherinthefuture.

Onegroupofresearcherscriticalofthedominanceoflaboratory-basedapproachestostudyingnegotiationarguethatresearchershavebeentooquicktogeneralizefromsimpleresearchstudies(“transactionalnegotiations”)tonegotiatingincomplexrelationships.

Thereareseveralwaysthatanexistingrelationshipchangesnegotiationdynamics.

Negotiatingwithinrelationshipstakesplaceovertime.

Therelationshipbetweennegotiatorsinalabendswhenthesimulationisover.

Timebecomesanimportantvariable—understandinghowpartiespackageortradeoffissuesovertime.

Beyonddiscussionofissues,negotiationisawaytolearnmoreabouttheotherpartyandincreaseinterdependence.

Inalabsetting,theshorttimespanleadsnegotiatorstogatherinformationinordertoactontheirownpreferences.

Inarelationship,gatheringinformationisanimportantactivityinfindingcommonalityandimprovingtheongoingrelationship.

Resolutionofsimpledistributiveissueshasimplicationsforthefuture.

Resultsofanynegotiationmayshiftthepoweranddependencedynamicsinafuturerelationship.

Thesedynamicscancreatereputationproblemsinthefuture.

Distributiveissueswithinrelationshipnegotiationscanbeemotionallyhot.

Expressingangermakesnegotiatingoverotherissuesdifficult.

Thepartiesmayhavetocoolofforapologizebeforetheycanproceed.

Negotiatingwithinrelationshipsmayneverend.

Negotiationsinasimulationhaveadefinedendand‘players’oftenabandoncooperativestrategiesinfavorofgettingtheotheronthelastmove.

Inmanyrelationships,negotiationsareneveroverandthismayhaveseveralconsequences:

Partiesmaydefernegotiationsovertoughissuesinordertostartontherightfoot.

Attemptingtoanticipatethefutureandnegotiateeverythingupfrontisoftenimpossible.

Issuesonwhichpartiestrulydisagreemaynevergoaway.

Inmanynegotiations,theotherpersonisthefocalproblem.

Whilethepartiesmightengageinextensiveeffortsto“separatethepersonfromtheproblem”andfindviablesolutions,anintractablenegotiationproblemmaymeanrelationshipdissolutionistheonlyanswer.

Insomenegotiations,relationshippreservationisthenegotiationgoal,andpartiesmaymakeconcessionsonsubstantiveissuestopreserveorenhancetherelationship.

Accommodationisfarmorelikelyasastrategyinrelationshipnegotiationsthanitisinmarkettransactions.

Insummary,wehaveidentifiedseveralissuesthatmakenegotiatinginrelationshipdifferentfromandmorechallengingthanconductingeitherdistributiveorintegrativenegotiationsbetweenpartieswhohavenopastorintendedfuturerelationship.

Itisnotalwaysclearhowtheprescriptivelessonslearnedfromlaboratorystudiesandmarkettransactionsapplytonegotiationwithinactual,ongoingrelationships.

NegotiationsinCommunalSharingRelationships

Therehasbeensomewhatmoreresearchonnegotiationincommunal-sharingrelationshipsandcomparedtothoseinotherkindsofnegotiationsresearchershavefoundthatpartieswhoareinacommunal-sharingrelationship:

Aremorecooperativeandempathetic.

Performbetteronbothdecision-makingandperformance-coordinationtasks.

Focustheirattentionontheotherparty’soutcomesaswellastheirown.

Aremorelikelytoshareinformationwiththeotherandlesslikelytousecoercivetactics.

Maybemorelikelytousecompromiseorproblemsolvingasstrategiesforresolvingconflicts.

Relationalidentitytheoryholdsthatgroupsdefinedbycommonethnic,economic,orpoliticalinterestsoftenfunctionasa“tribe,”makingnegotiationtechniquesthatfocusonissues,notidentities,arealmostpredestinedtofail.

Itisunclearwhetherpartiesincloserelationshipsproducebettersolutionsthanothernegotiatorsdo.

Somestudiesfindthatpartieswhodonothaveacloserelationshipweremorelikelytoarriveatintegrativesolutions.

Maybebecausenegotiatorsinarelationshipdonotpushforpreferredsolutionsinordertominimizeconflict.

Ortheymaysacrificetheirownpreferencesinordertopreservetherelationship.

Somestudiesexplorehowpartiesinarelationshipenactdifferentrelationshipforms,andtheconsequencesofthosedifferencesontheirapproachtonegotiation.

Inastudyofdivorcemediation,mentendtoarguebasedonprinciplesoflaw,whilewomenuseargumentsbasedonpersonalresponsibility.

Mentendtobemoreunemotionalandreserved,whilewomenexpressfeelingsofinsultorpain.

Fordeeperinsightintoconflictmanagementinrelationships,seeBox9.1(summarizedinthefollowingbullets).

Along-termstudyofconflictresolutioninmarriagesprovidestheseinsights.

Successfulcoupleslookforwaystostaypositiveandsay“yes”asoftenaspossible.

Theyembraceconflictasawaytoworkthroughdifferences,ratherthantrytoavoiditorgiveinallthetime.

Goodrelationshipsarenotonlyabouthowtofight,butalsoabouthowtorepairarelationshipafterafight.

Successfullong-termrelationshipsarecharacterizedbycontinuingtostresswhattheylike,value,appreciate,andrespectintheother.

KeyElementsinManagingNegotiationswithinRelationships

Onestudyofworkrelationshipsidentifiedeightkeydimensions:trust,support,affect(emotion),loyalty,accountability,instrumentality(howmuchvalueanticipatesfromasocialexchange),respect,andflexibility.

Somedimensionswerecriticalatthebeginningoftherelationship—instrumentality,affect,andrespect.

Whileotherswerecriticalasarelationshipmatured.

Acrossavarietyofdifferentkindsofworkrelationshipstrustwasthemostcommonandimportantdimension.

Reputationsalsoplayedimportantrolesshapingrelationshipdevelopment.

Justicewasalsoanimportantrelationshipcomponent.

Reputation

Reputationisaperceptualidentity,reflectiveofthecombinationofsalientpersonalcharacteristicsandaccomplishments,demonstratedbehaviorandintendedimagespreservedovertime,asobserveddirectlyand/orasreportedfromsecondarysources.

Researchhasidentifiedseveralimportantaspectsofreputation.

Reputationsareperceivedandhighlysubjectiveinnature.

Itisnothowwewouldliketobeknown,orhowwethinkweareknown—itiswhatothersactuallythinkofus,andtheirjudgment,thatcounts.

Onceformed,areputationishowpeopleformtheirexpectationsforfuturebehavior.

Anindividualcanhaveanumberofdifferent,evenconflicting,reputations.

Apersonmayusedistributivebargainingwithsomeandbequiteintegrativewithothers.

Mostcommonly,areputationsisasingleandconsistentimagefrommanypersonsacrossmanycontexts.

Reputationsareshapedbypastbehavior.

Directreputations(fromourownexperience)maybedifferentfromheresayreputations(basedonothers’experiences).

Individualstendtotrusttheirownexperienceoverothers’experiences.

Reputationisinfluencedbyanindividual’spersonalcharacteristicsandaccomplishments.

Includeage,race,gender;educationandpastexperience;andpersonalitytraits,skills,andbehaviors.

Alloftheseworktogetherovertimetocreateabroadreputation.

Reputationsdevelopovertime;oncedeveloped,theyarehardtochange.

Earlyexperienceswithanothershapeourviews,whichwebringtonewsituationsintheformofexpectations.

Theseexpectationsarethenconfirmedordisconfirmedbythenextsetofexperiences.

So,firstimpressionsandearlyexperiencesarepowerfulinshapingexpectations.

Other'sreputationscanshapeemotionalstatesaswellastheirexpectations.

Goodhearsayreputationscreatepositiveemotionalresponsesandbadhearsayreputationselicitnegativeemotionalresponsesfromothers.

Negativereputationsaredifficultto“repair.”

Reputationsneedtobeactivelydefendedandrenewedinothers’eyes.

Howweaccountforpastbehavior,howweapologizeandaskotherstooverlookthepast,orhowweuseexcusestoexplainpastactionshasamajorimpactonhowothersrememberus.

Trust

Onedefinitionoftrustisanindividual’sbeliefinandwillingnesstoactonthewords,actions,anddecisionsofanother.

Threethingscontributetotheleveloftrustonenegotiatorhasforanother:

Thenegotiator’schronicdispositiontowardtrust—individualdifferencesinpersonalitythatmakesomepeoplemoretrustingthanothers.

Situationfactors—suchastheopportunityforthepartiestocommunicatewithotheradequately.

Andthehistoryoftherelationshipbetweentheparties.

RecentResearchonTrustandNegotiation

Earlystudiesshowedhigherlevelsoftrustmakenegotiationseasierandintegrativeprocessestendtoincreasetrust.

ConsiderablenewresearchhasbeenconductedinthelastdecadeandvariousfindingsaresummarizedinTable9.1(andinthefollowingbullets).

Individualantecedentsoftrustinnegotiation.

Peoplegenerallystartwithhighlevelsoftrustevenwithoutdataaboutthesituationortheotherparty.

Individualmotivesshapeexpectationsoftrust.

Personalitydifferencesshapeexpectations.

Someindividualshaveagreaterdispositiontotrust,othershaveastrongdispositiontodistrust.

Emotionscontributetotrustordistrust.

Angercontributestodistrustandmorecompetitivebehavior,whilehopeandpositiveemotionscontributetotrustandcooperativebehavior.

Situationalantecedentsoftrustinnegotiation.

Thenatureofthenegotiationprocessshapestrustexpectations.

Partieswhoexpectmoredistributivenegotiationsarelesstrustingthanpartieswhoexpectintegrativenegotiations.

Face-to-facenegotiationencouragesgreatertrustdevelopmentthanonlinenegotiation.

Negotiatorswhoarerepresentingothers’intereststendtobelesstrustingandlesstrustworthythaniftheyarerepresentingtheirowninterests.

Trustandnegotiationprocesses.

Theemphasisonfocusingondifferentthingsisamplifiedbythetypeofnegotiationsthepartiesexpect.

Isdistributivenegotiationisexpected,negotiatorsfocusontheriskstheyfacebydisclosinginformation,whilethetrusteesfocusonthebenefitstheymightgainfromwhattheylearnfromtheother.

Ifintegrativenegotiationisexpected,negotiatorsfocusmoreonwhatkindofinformationtheycanprovidetotheother,whilethetrusteefocusesonwhatkindofinformationtheyneedfromtheothertomeetcommoninterests.

Trusttendstoincreasethenumberof“positive”turningpointsaroundcommoninterestsanddecreasesthenumberof“negative”turningpointsthatmightdeadlockanegotiationaroundpolarizationofissuesornegativeemotions.

Outcomesoftrust.

Trustcuescooperativebehavior.

Trustenhancesthesharingofinformation,andgreaterinformationsharinggenerallyleadstobetternegotiationoutcomes.

Partieswhotrustoneanothertendtocommunicatemorebyusingquestionsandanswersinordertoshareinformationandunderstandtheother’sperspective.

Partieswhotrusteachotherlesstendtoargueforandjustifytheirownpreferencesandlistenlesstotheother—hence,theyarelesslikelytounderstandtheother’sperspectiveandmorelikelyto“force”theirviewontheotherparty.

SeeBox9.2forbuildingtrustatthenegotiationtable(summarizedinthefollowingbullets).

Learnwhatyoucanaboutyourcounterpart.

Gettingreputationalinformationfromevenonesourcecanbehelpful,andevenmorehelpfulfromseveralpeoplewhoknowtheindividual.

Gettoknowthepersonbeforeyouformallynegotiate.

Recommendedwhetheryouhavedealtwiththeothernegotiatorbefore,ornot.

Ifnot,learnabitabouteachother’sbackground.

Ifyoudoknowtheotherparty,usethetimetocatchup.

Proceedwithcautionontheother’strustworthiness.

Evenifyoubelieveyoucantrusttheother,usesafeguardstoprotectyouagainsterrorsinjudgment.

Variouscognitivebiasescontributetooverconfidenceintheother’strustworthiness.

Wintheother’strust.

Makesuretheotherunderstandsthe“cost”ofamajorconcessiononyourpartandthatyoudon’tunderestimatethevalueofaconcessionontheirpart.

Listentoandacknowledgetheother’sconcerns.

Thiscreatesfeelingsoffairnesswhichhaveastrongimpactontrustdevelopmentandoverallsatisfactionthenegotiationdeal.

Acknowledgingemotionmaybeoneofthemostimportantpartsofeffectivelisteningasavehicleforbuildingtrust.

TrustRepair

Sincetrustandpositivenegotiationprocessesandoutcomesappeartobesocritical,weshouldcommentonwaysthatbrokentrustcanberepairedinordertoreturnnegotiationstowardamoreproductivedirection.

Recentresearchhasshownthattherearethreemajorstrategiesthatatrustviolatorcanusetorepairtrust.

Verbalaccounts–useofwordsoremotionalexpressionsinanefforttorepairtheviolation—addresstheintentwithapologies,explanations,andaccounts.

Apologiesarethemostcommonandagoodapologyincludessixmajorelements:

Anexpressionofregretfortheoffense.

Anexplanationofwhytheviolationoccurred.

Anacknowledgmentofresponsibilityforcausingtheaction.

Adeclarationofrepentance.

Anoffertorepairtheimpactoftheviolation.

Andarequestforforgiveness.

Researchontheimpactofapologiesshowstheycanbeveryeffectiveinrepairingtrust—asummaryofresearchispresentedinTable9.2andsummarizedbelow.

Anapology,orsomekindofverbalstatementacknowledgingthattrustmighthavebeenbroken,ismoreeffectivethannotmakinganycomment.

Thesooneranapologyoccurs,themoreeffectiveitislikelytobe.

Themoresincereanapology,themoreeffectiveitis.

Iftheapologizertakespersonalresponsibility,theapologyismoreeffectivethaniftheytrytoblameexternalcircumstances.

Ifthebreakoftrustwasanisolatedevent,theapologyismorelikelytobeaccepted.

Iftheincidentwasnotcreatedbydeceptivebehavior,theapologyismorelikelytobeaccepted.

Deceptiveconductappearstodomoredamagetotrustthanviolationsduetolowcompetenceorlowbenevolence.

Reparations–paymentofcompensationtothevictimsfortheconsequencessufferedfromtheviolator.

Onestudyshowedthatwhileapologiesenhancetrustrepair,makingafinancialofferofpenancewasessentialtoanytrustrepaireffort.

Theamountofmoneyofferedislesscriticalthantheofferitself.

Asecondstudyfoundthatthemosteffectivereparationwasoneslightlylargerthantheamountlost,unlessthetrustviolationwastheresultofdeceptivebehavior.

Structuralsolutions–maketheefforttocreaterules,regulations,andprocedurestominimizethelikelihoodofviolationinthefuture.

Rulesandprocedurescanbestrengthenedbyalsocreatingfinesandpenaltiesforruleviolation.

Oneformiscalled“hostageposting”inwhichthepartiesposta“securitydeposit”orresourcethatislostiftrustisviolated.

Justice

Thethirdmajorissueinrelationshipsisthequestionsofwhatisfair,orjust.

Justicecantakeseveralforms:

Distributivejusticeisaboutthedistributionofoutcomes.

Partiesmaybeconcernedthatonepartyisreceivingmorethantheydeserve,

Thatoutcomesshouldbedistributedequally,or

Thatoutcomesshouldbedistributedbasedonneeds.

Proceduraljusticeisabouttheprocessofdeterminingoutcomes.

Partiesmaybeconcernedtheywerenottreatedfairlyduringthenegotiation,

Thattheywerenotgivenachancetooffertheirpointofview,or

Thattheywerenottreatedwithrespect.

Concernsaboutproceduralfairnessarisemostwhennegotiatorsarejudgingthebehaviorofthirdparties.

Interactionaljusticeisabouthowpartiestreateachotherinone-to-onerelationships.

Peoplehavestrongexpectationsaboutthewaysanotherpartyshouldtreatthemandwhenthosestandardsareviolated,partiesfeelunfairlytreated.

Systemicjusticeisabouthoworganizationsappeartotreatgroupsofindividualsandthenormsthatdevelopforhowtheyshouldbetreated.

Whengroupsarediscriminatedagainst,disenfranchised,orgivenpoorersalariesorworkingconditions,theymaythinkthesystemisbiased.

Theissueoffairnessisbeginningtoreceivesomesystematicinvestigationinnegotiationdynamics—followingareconclusionsdrawnfromkeystudies.

Involvementintheprocessofshapingnegotiationstrategyincreasescommitmenttothatstrategyandwillingnesstopursueit.

Proceduraljusticeappearstoimpactthewaynegotiatorsapproachthenegotiationprocess.

Proceduraljusticeisstronglyrelatedtousingproblem-solvingandintegrativeoutcomes.

Thedurabilityofthenegotiatedagreementisstronglyrelatedtodistributivejustice—thepartiesassuretheagreementis“fair”toallparties.

Negotiatorsencouragedtothinkaboutfairnessweremorecooperativeindistributivenegotiations.

Whentheotherpartydidnotreciprocatecooperativebehavior,thenegotiatorretaliatedandpunishedtheother’scompetitivebehavior.

Partieswhoreceiveofferstheyperceiveasunfairmayrejectthemoutofhand,eventhoughtheamountofferedmaybebetterthantheirBATNA.

Here,intangiblesenterthenegotiation.

Aless-than-fairsmalloffercreatesfeelingsofangerandwoundedpride,andnegotiatorswilloftenactspitefullytosinktheentiredealratherthanacceptatokenoffer.

Establishmentofsomeobjectivestandardoffairnesshasapositiveimpactonnegotiationsandsatisfactionwiththeoutcome.

Knowledgeofanopponent’sBATNA,andinformationaboutestimatedmarketpricesforthenegotiatedobject,stronglydeterminesanegotiator’sjudgmentoffairness.

Judgmentsoffairnessaresubjecttocognitivebiases.

Forexample,anegocentricbiasmeansanegotiatorwantsmoreforthemselves.

Anegocentricbiascanbediminishedbystronginteractionaljustice.

Egocentricbiasesvaryacrosscultures.

StrongerinindividualisticculturesliketheU.S.andlesssoincollectivistcultureslikeJapan.

Negotiatedagreementsmaybeseenasprocedurallyfair,yetonestudyshowsthataftersuchagreementsarestruck,negotiatorsperceivetheirpartnersaslessfairandareunwillingtoengageinfutureexchangeswiththem.

Ratherthanmakingthingsmorefair,negotiatedexchangesmayemphasizetheconflictbetweenactorsblindtotheirownbiasesandseetheotherparty’smotivesinanunfavorablelight.

RelationshipsamongReputation,TrustandJustice

Notonlyarevariousformsofjusticeinterrelated,butreputations,trust,andjusticeallinteractinshapingexpectationsoftheother’sbehavior.

Whenonepartyfeelstheotheractedfairlyinthepastorwillactfairlyinthefuture,theyaremorelikelytotrusttheother.

Conversely,whenpartiesareunfairlytreated,theyoftenbecomeangryandretaliateagainsteithertheinjusticeitselforthosewhoareseenascausingit.

Trust,justice,andreputationareallcentraltorelationshipnegotiationsandfeedeachother.

RepairingaRelationship

Thereareseveralstepsforimprovingarelationship.SeeBox9.3foroneexample.Talkthroughthefollowingquestionstohelpidentifyproblemsandimprovearelationship.

Whatmightbecausinga