Conflict And Negotiation

Organizational behavior

Individual project

-Conflict and negotiation-

Prof. dr. coordinator

WANDER CARVALHO

[anonimizat]

Index

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………..4

Chapter 1. Introduction to conflict studies in organizational behavior…………………………….5

1.1 Defying and understanding conflict…………………………………………………………………5

1.2 Traditional view of conflict/ Recent approaches view of conflict…………………………………..6

1.3 Types of conflict……………………………………………………………………………………..7

1.4 Levels of conflict (Forms of conflict in Organizations)……………………………………………..8

Chapter 2.Development of conflict theory…………………………………………………………..10

2.1 The 4 stages of conflict…………………………………………………………………………….10

2.2 Conflict management styles…………………………………………………………………….…11

2.3 Causes and outcomes of conflict……………………………………………………………….….12

2.4 The importance of culture in conflict………………………………………………………….……14

2.5 Is conflict always a bad thing? ……………………………………………………………………………………………15

Chapter 3. The concept of Negotiation………………………………………………………………17

3.1. Understanding and defying negotiation……………………………………………………………17

3.2. Negotiation styles……………………………………………………………………………….…17

3.3 Negotiation strategies……………………………………………………………………………….19

Chapter 4. Key principles and mistakes in negotiation………………………………………….…19

4.1 Common mistakes in negotiation………………………………………………………………..…19

4.2 Third-party negotiation. Advantages and disadvantages…………………………………………..21

4.3 Success in negotiation (tips)…………………………………………………………………….….22

4.4 Ethic in negotiation…………………………………………………………………………………23

4.5 The connection between conflict and negotiation……………………………………………….…23

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………..……24

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………..………….26

Introduction

My opinion is that this theme is extremely interesting because nowadays conflict in companies is a very common problem and the executives have to constantly learn new ways to deal with it. Also, negotiation is essential everywhere. It is not only in the companies where negotiation is important but also in our daily life. We all must try our best to gain negotiation skills, to avoid misunderstandings and lead a peaceful and a stress free life. This is the main reason why in my project I have chosen to pay attention to negotiation strategies and styles.

This project is divided in four chapters, as the following: Introduction to conflict studies in organizational behavior, Development of conflict theory, The concept of Negotiation and the last chapter, Key principles and mistakes in negotiation.

I’ve started by defying the concepts of conflict and negotiation in a company and I have tried to see if managing conflict and engaging in effective negotiation are both key for effective organizational behavior within organizations, as well as daily life. I have focused on the styles, the types and the stages of both approached concepts, and finally I have given an answer to the question: Is conflict always a bad thing? I have also highlighted the importance of negotiation strategies and the common mistakes that take place during the process of negotiation.

In the first chapter, I focused on the types and levels of conflict and I’ve made a comparison between the traditional view and the recent approaches view of conflict, in order to see how conflict has changed during the past years. Then, for the second chapter, I have approached the subject of development of conflict, showing the causes and the outcomes of it, and how important is culture in managing a conflict. The third chapter is based on the principles of negotiation and all its aspects. I’ve described the negotiations styles, to show the variety of them, depending on the situation.

The last chapter contains the key principles in negotiation and also the common mistakes that people make during this process. I gave a few tips for reaching success in a negotiation and I approached subjects such as mediation and arbitration.

Finally, I come with proper solutions for managing conflict and for achieving an effective negotiation process.

Chapter 1. Introduction to conflict studies in Organizational Behavior

Defying and understanding conflict

Conflict is a process that involves people disagreeing. Researchers from all over the world have noted that conflict is like the “common cold”. Everyone knows what it is, but understanding its causes and how to treat it is much more challenging. Also, conflict can range from tiny disagreements to workplace violence and aggressiveness.

Conflict is a process in which people disagree over significant issues, thereby creating friction. In order for conflict to occur, several factors must be present:

• People must have opposing perceptions, interests, feelings and thoughts

• Those involved must recognize the existence of different points of view,

• The disagreement must be ongoing rather than a singular occurrence,

• People with opposing views must try to prevent the other from accomplishing their goals.

Conflicts it’s a phenomenon that happens every day in each organization. There are impossible to avoid, but it is possible though to manage them in a way that we recognize the conflict symptoms in time. It is necessary to continuously track the organizational signals, which point to their existence. In case we don’t react in due time, this can lead to a situation where the conflict itself manages the organization. One of the best definition that I read about is that “problems mostly occur in those organizations where the business results directly depend on collaboration, team work and creativity, and where having only the results in mind, we tend to forget to take care of people and mutual relationships.”

The employees directly involved in the conflict often do not have the opportunity to cope with the whole situation or the impact of all elements in the given situation, mostly because of restricted ability for decision-making.

In the environment of interpersonal relationship there will always be differences, and conflict will be the norm, not the exception. People need to manage conflict in order to obtain profitable return from it. Managing conflict requires that we consider not only the required guidance and control to keep conflict at an acceptable level, not to high, but also the activity to encourage proper conflict when the level is too low.

We have to note the fact that we often use the terms conflict and competition interchangeably, although the two differ. Competition is the rivalry between individuals or groups over an outcome and always has a winner and a loser. While competition can be one of the sources of conflict, conflict does not necessarily involve winners and losers, we can have conflict over issues, but cooperate so that no one loses or wins.

Traditional view of conflict/ Recent approaches view of conflict

Throughout the years there were times when conflict was perceived in a different way, so we distinguish different views and approaches of a conflict, like above:

the traditional view of conflict

the human relations view

the interactionist view.

Following the traditional view of conflict in ‘30s and ‘40s of the last century it is believed that the conflict is something bad, that it is destructive for the organization, and that it should be avoided. It is considered that the sources of conflict are mostly the results of bad communication and lack of trust. According to this standpoint one person should avoid conflict, as well as people who make the conflict, so that the work performance be satisfactory.

The main starting point by human relations view is that the conflict is something natural which occurs within every organization. This view is characteristic for the period from the ‘40s to the ‘70s of the last century. It is considered that conflicts should be accepted, and that conflicts eventually can lead to better work performance.

The Interacionist view is still represented today, and is based on the approach according to which conflicts should be encouraged, because they tend to have a positive effect on creativity and innovation with the employees.

According to the traditional theory of organization, both neoclassical theory of organization and contemporary theory of organization confirm the afore made division which we have also used.

The most frequent question placed on the organizations is why does the conflict occur in organizations?

Most common reasons for conflict in organization are the following: disparate personalities, disparate value systems, improper communication restricted, resources ,unclear working duties, , interdependent working duties (one person cannot do its part of work until the other person does its part), complexity in organization (more complex organizations are subject to conflict), unrealistic or unclear rules and standards, unrealistic deadlines, collective decision making (the chance for conflict commensurate, with the number of people who participate in decision making), consensus decision-making (there is no consensus or agreement without conflict), unrealistic expectations (employees who have unrealistic expectations related to content of work, income and possibilities for promotion are more exposed to conflict), unsettled or suppressed former conflict. It is possible to categorize conflicts in different ways.

It is of high importance to distinguish between functional and dysfunctional conflicts. Functional conflicts as ones which tend to encourage accomplishing organization’s goals and improvement of work performance, whereas conflicts which aggravate accomplishing goals are destructive or dysfunctional.

Functional conflict: Enhances/benefits organizational performance. It occurs when the groups disagree on the best means to achieve a goal, not on the goal itself; typically results in selection of a better means alternative. Positive contributions of functional conflict are:

Plays an essential role in preventing group or organizational stagnation and resistance to change.

Can lead to increased awareness of problems that need to be addressed.

Can result in broader and more productive searches for solutions.

Can facilitate change, adaptation, and innovation.

Dysfunctional conflict: Any conflict that hinders the achievement of organizational goals. Management must always try to eliminate such conflict. Functional intergroup conflict can turn into dysfunctional conflict.

The functional conflict represents a healthy, constructive disagreement between two or more people, while the dysfunctional conflict represents an unhealthy and destructive disagreement between two or more people.

Types of conflict

Substantive conflict- a fundamental disagreement over ends or goals to be pursued and the means for their accomplishment.

Emotional conflict- interpersonal difficulties that arise over feelings of mistrust, fear, anger, dislike and resentment.

Types of Conflict

Task Conflict‐ conflicts over content and goals of the work

Relationship Conflict‐conflict based on interpersonal relationships

Process Conflict‐conflict over how work gets done

1.4 Levels of conflict (Forms of conflict in Organizations)

Figure 1. Levels of Conflict

Managers spend most of their time dealing with conflict situations and it is very important for them to understand the types of conflict, in order to find the appropriate techniques to deal with these conflicts. Conflicts can be classified into the following categories:

Individual level conflict/Intrapersonal conflict,

Interpersonal conflict,

Group level conflict,

Organizational conflict.

Individual/Intrapersonal conflict arises within a person. The experience takes place in the person’s mind. It is a type of conflict that is psychological and it is involving the individual’s thoughts, principles, values and emotions. For example, when you are uncertain about what is expected or wanted, or you have a sense of being inadequate to perform a task, you are experiencing an intrapersonal conflict. Another type of intrapersonal conflict involves role ambiguity. There are some basic causes of conflict among individuals, such as incomparability, unacceptability, uncertainty, frustration, goal conflict and role conflict. This type of conflict can be quite difficult to handle if you find it hard to decipher your inner struggles. It leads to restlessness and uneasiness, or can even cause depression. In such occasions, the best solution would be to find a way to let go of the anxiety by communicating with other people. Thus, the experience evoked a positive change which will help you in your own personal growth.

Interpersonal Conflict is among individuals such as co-workers, a manager and an employee, or CEOs and their staff. Many companies suffer due to interpersonal conflicts. This occurs typically because people are different from one another. We have different personalities which usually results to incompatible opinions and choices. Apparently, it is a natural occurrence which can eventually help in personal growth or in developing your relationship with others. Four primary sources of interpersonal conflict are: personal differences, stress, lack of information and role in compatibility.

In addition, coming up with adjustments is necessary for managing this type of conflict. Keeping conflicts centered around ideas rather than individual differences is important in avoiding a conflict escalation. However, when interpersonal conflict gets too destructive, calling in a mediator would help so as to have it resolved.

Group Level Conflict. There are two or more members in a group which has a well defined structure of role and status relations and also have a system of values and norms of behavior. The groups not only affect their members but they also have an impact on other groups and on the organization. The members of a group regularly interact with each other and during this process of interaction, two types of conflict can arise: intra-group conflict or inter-group conflict.

Inter-group Conflict is the conflict that takes place between different groups. Types of groups may include different departments or divisions in a firm, and employee union and management, or competing companies that supply the same customers. Departments may conflict over budget allocations, unions and management may disagree over work rules, suppliers may conflict with each other on the quality of parts. Merging two groups together can lead to friction between the groups, especially if there are scarce resources to be divided among the group. This is due to the varied sets of goals and interests of these different groups. In addition, competition also contributes for intergroup conflict to arise. There are other factors which fuel this type of conflict. Some of these factors may include a rivalry in resources or the boundaries set by a group to others which establishes their own identity as a team.

Intra-group conflict is a type of conflict that happens among individuals within a team. The incompatibilities and misunderstandings among these individuals lead to an intra-group conflict. It is arises from interpersonal disagreements ( team members have different personalities which may lead to tension) or differences in views and ideas ( in a presentation, members of the team might find the notions presented by the one presiding to be erroneous due to their differences in opinion). An intra-group conflict usually arises in the following three ways: when the group faces a new problem, when new values are imported into the group from the social environment or when the extra group role of a person comes into a conflict with his intra-group role. Within a team, conflict can be helpful in coming up with decisions which will eventually allow them to reach their objectives as a team.

Organization conflict. All the conflicts that have been discussed above relate to the conflicts within the organizational setting. Inter-organizational conflicts take place between the organizations that are dependent on each other in some way. The conflicts that take place at the individual level or the group level are all inherent in the organization level conflict. Such a conflict could be between the buyer and the seller organization, between the government agencies that regulate certain organizations and the organization that the affected by them or between the unions of workers and their organization. Intra-organizational conflicts occur across departments in an organization, within work teams and other groups, and between individuals. The organization level conflict should be properly handled so that it can play a constructive role in achieving the goals of the organization.

Chapter 2. Development of conflict theory

2.1 The 4 stages of conflict

In the multiple accepted models of conflict, the conflict process is broken into any number of stages. No matter how finely the process is dissected, one fact remains: conflict happens. Organizations and individuals can benefit from recognizing the basic stages of conflict because understanding the dynamic leads to easier and longer lasting resolution.

The first stage is also called as latent stage in which certain characteristics, like communication, structure and personal variables, can lead to conflict. It is important to point out that it is not necessary to have the simultaneous occurrence of all three factors (conditions), but the occurrence of just one.

Communication in organization is very important, because if there is a lack of communication in the organization this would lead to conflict. But also too much communication, as well as obstacles in communication, possible lack of understanding or noise in the communication channel can produce conflict as a consequence.

The second stage, cognition and personalization stage represents the outcome of the impact of first phase factors. We distinguish two sub stages in this stage:

• perception of the participants in conflict – which does not mean that conflict has occurred,

• until it hasn’t come to articulation of feelings and expression of awareness of conflict, we can’t really say that the conflict itself occurs.

In the third stage there comes to conflict manifestation. There is hostile behavior among participants in conflict and we say there comes to the so called open disagreement.

The last stage in this process of conflict is the conflict outcome which shows us the further relationship development of the participants in conflict and the consequences of conflict. The consequences of conflict can be manifest through increased working efficacy of the organization in whole or quite the contrary, the decrease of working efficacy.

2.2 Conflict management styles

The success of the organization depends on the ability of conflict recognition and the very way of conflict management. Conflict management implies integration of all factors which can contribute to conflict resolution or its prevention. Those factors are improvement of communication and practicing discipline in the organization, as well as having in mind the life phases of parties included. The organization appears as the mediator between adversaries or as arbitrator. Moreover, it is generally acknowledged that conflict represents the most severe test of manager’s interpersonal skills.

Dominance – it occurs when the cooperation is extremely low, and the persistence in satisfying of personal interests is high. By this strategy conflict is resolved in a way to satisfy the needs of one party damaging the other party involved in the conflict.

Integration – cooperation is high, as well as the persistence in satisfying of one’s own needs, so there is to be sought for the appropriate solution for all parties involved in the conflict.

Compromise – there is an equal wish for medium level of cooperation and persistence in satisfying of one’s personal needs, so the conflict is resolved so that each party involved in conflict gives up the part of the value.

Avoiding – when the cooperation as well as persistence in satisfying of one’s personal needs is very low. In that case the conflict resolution will be solved by withdrawal or repression of conflict.

Cooperativeness – the readiness for cooperation is extremely high, and the conflict is resolved by putting the other party’s interests before its own.

2.3 Causes and outcomes of conflict

Consequences of Conflict. Conflict can arise because of both personal and organizational sources. While it is not always easy to separate the two, some conflicts are more directly related to individuals having incompatible goals or values while others are related to the way the organization is structured or managed.

Organizational Structure. Conflict tends to take different forms, depending upon the organizational structure. For example, if a company uses a matrix structure as its organizational form, it will have decisional conflict built in, because the structure specifies that each manager report to two bosses.

Limited Resources. Resources such as money, time, and equipment are often scarce. Competition among people or departments for limited resources is a frequent cause for conflict.

Task Interdependence. Another cause of conflict is task interdependence; that happens, when accomplishment of your goal requires you to rely on others to perform their tasks. For example, if you’re tasked with creating advertising for your product, you’re dependent on the creative team to design the words and layout, the photographer or videographer to create the visuals, the media buyer to purchase the advertising space, and so on.

Incompatible Goals. Sometimes conflict arises when two parties think that their goals are mutually exclusive. Within an organization, incompatible goals often arise because of the different ways department managers are compensated. For example, a sales manager’s bonus may be tied to how many sales are made for the company. As a result, the individual might be tempted to offer customers “freebies” such as expedited delivery in order to make the sale.

Personality Differences. Personality differences among coworkers are common. By understanding some fundamental differences among the way people think and act, we can better understand how others see the world.

Communication Problems. Sometimes conflict arises simply out of a small, unintentional communication problem, such as lost e-mails or dealing with people who don’t return phone calls. Giving feedback is also a case in which the best intentions can quickly escalate into a conflict situation. One of the most common outcomes of conflict is that it upsets parties in the short run. However, conflict can have both positive and negative outcomes. On the positive side, conflict can result in greater creativity or better decisions. For example, as a result of a disagreement over a policy, a manager may learn from an employee that newer technologies help solve problems in an unanticipated new way.

From the outcomes of conflict we mention the positive outcomes, including the following: -the consideration of a broader range of ideas, resulting in a better, stronger idea; surfacing of assumptions that may be inaccurate; increased participation and creativity; clarification of individual views that build learning;

The examples of the negative outcomes, includes the following: -increased stress and anxiety among individuals, which decreases productivity and satisfaction; feelings of being defeated and demeaned, which lowers individuals’ morale and may increase turnover; a climate of mistrust, which hinders the teamwork and cooperation necessary to get work done.

2.4 The importance of culture in conflict

Culture is an essential part of conflict and conflict resolution. Though cultures are powerful, they are often unconscious, influencing conflict and attempts to resolve conflict in imperceptible ways. Cultures are more than language, dress, and food customs. Cultural groups may share race, ethnicity, or nationality, but they also arise from cleavages of generation, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation, ability and disability, political and religious affiliation, language, and gender. Two things are essential to remember about cultures: they are always changing, and they relate to the symbolic dimension of life. The symbolic dimension is the place where we are constantly making meaning and enacting our identities. Culture is a factor in conflict, whether it plays a central role or influences it subtly and gently. For any conflict that touches us where it matters, where we make meaning and hold our identities, there is always a cultural component. When the cultural groups we belong to are a large majority in our community or nation, we are less likely to be aware of the content of the messages they send us. Cultures shared by dominant groups often seem to be "natural," "normal" -"the way things are done." We only notice the effect of cultures that are different from our own, attending to behaviors that we label exotic or strange. Cultures can determinate how people handle and view the conflict. Individuals’ predispositions have their root in their early social and cultural experiences, and, because conflict is a behavior that can be interpreted different by individuals, culture shapes people’s interpretation of behavior and their style of interaction with others. This is why cultural values create a social environment that encourages members to select some behaviors over others. Some cultures are more tolerant and accepting of conflict than others who tend to view it as a sign of trouble. Any cross-cultural contact has the potential for conflict because people from different cultures often have different values and goals. Any differences in goals or values can lead to conflict, so we cannot identify all those differences here. It thus is not surprising that research has also found that strategies for negotiating conflict vary according to one’s cultural background and cultural values. Collectivist cultures such as those of Asian, Middle Eastern, and Latin American countries tend to adopt a harmony perspective on conflict. Individualistic cultures in English-speaking countries are more likely to use a confrontational approach. Eastern European and Hispanic countries are likely to adopt a regulative model of conflict, which relies on bureaucracy and organizational structure to contain conflict. Social status and gender, group-level cultural factors, will also influence individuals’ choice of conflict management strategies.

The culture of an organization can also act in much the same way as national or group culture. An organization based on individual achievement and competition will encourage conflict, whereas one based on cooperation and group consensus is likely to discourage conflict. Furthermore, because of the leader’s impact on culture, a leader’s conflict management style, which we discuss later in this chapter, can affect how the organization as a whole views and manages conflict.

2.5 Is conflict always a bad thing?

Most people are uncomfortable with conflict, but is conflict always bad? Conflict can be dysfunctional if it paralyzes an organization, leads to less than optimal performance, or, in the worst case, leads to workplace violence. Surprisingly, a moderate amount of conflict can actually be a necessary and health part of organizational life. To understand how to get to a positive level of conflict, we need to understand its root causes, the consequences, and the tools to help manage it. The impact of too much or too little conflict can disrupt performance. If conflict is too low, then performance is low. If conflict is too high, then performance also tends to be low. The goal is to hold conflict levels in the middle of this range. While it might seem strange to want a particular level of conflict, a medium level of task-related conflict is often viewed as optimal, because it represents a situation in which a healthy debate of ideas takes place. Task conflict can be good in certain circumstances, such as in the early stages of decision making, because it stimulates creativity.

1. Conflict keeps you honest. To avoid an argument with someone else, you may find yourself omitting parts of the truth or essentially lying to someone else. And frequently, the fear of conflict prevents you from even being honest with yourself. You can’t say it out loud when it matters, so you don’t want to torture yourself by admitting your feelings internally. Most people, even your friends, aren’t going to seek out your opinion.

2. Conflict allows you to go deep. Conflict requires you to be completely honest with your emotions and your thoughts. But, it can also be a revealing experience that can go beneath the surface, beyond friendship and professional relationships. Once the dust settles after an argument, one should look around. If a friend or co-worker has walked away from you simply, just because you disagree with each other, this may be for the better, because a true relationship shouldn’t rely only on agreement. But, if they manage to solve the problems, and stick by your side, your relationship will enter into another level. This level couldn’t be achieved without the conflict to begin with.

3. Conflict helps to define your priorities. What you choose to fight for should be what you choose to be passionate about. No one wants to be in a state of constants arguing, so when you’re considering if you can enter in a conflict situations, you should first ask yourself: is this worth arguing over? Or is it for my own selfish need to be right? An individual should reflect on what his values are, and what battles are worth the impending conflict. An argument from once in a while can actually help you prioritize your opinions.

4. Conflict makes you happier. When you keep things to yourself in order to avoid an argument, you always feel even worse, because you start to become even angrier toward the other person. Resentment rises, and you tend to blame the other person for your inability to tell them what is bothering you. Your fear of conflict eventually will transform into a reality and it will create a new reason to be angrier. But once you have conquered that fear, you can approach conflict with confidence, saying everything you need to say in a respectful yet assertive way. You feel the weight of apprehension and silence lift away, until there’s nothing left but relief.

Also, if you decide to approach conflict in a positive way, it can improve the quality of decisions, arouse creativity and imagination, increase movement towards goals, create energetic climate, foster new ideas, alternatives and solutions and test positions and beliefs.

No one likes to deal with conflict.  But, from my point of view, conflict can actually be good. From conflict comes growth.  The trick is to discover how to manage conflict so that it stays healthy and doesn’t go down the path of destruction.  If we allow conflict to get out of hand, we can unknowingly create a toxic workplace and that is certainly something we want to avoid. Clearly, conflict has both positive and negative consequences.

Chapter 3. The concept of Negotiation

3.1. Understanding and defying negotiation

Negotiation is a process whereby two or more parties reach a mutually agreeable arrangement. It is one of the most commonly used and beneficial skills managers can develop. The global business environment, the diverse workforce, rapid pace of change, and shift toward teams and empowerment all require managers to hone their negotiation skills.

The negotiator Henry Kissinger defined negotiation as, “a process of combining conflicting positions into a common position, under a decision rule of unanimity”. Elsewhere, theorists have portrayed negotiations as events of diplomatic artistry, mechanical reflections of relative power, weighted interactions between personality types or rational decision-making processes. While formal definitions of negotiation vary, theorists do accept certain basic tenets. Foremost among them is the assumption that parties who negotiate agree in at least one fundamental respect; they share a belief that their respective purposes will be better served by entering into negotiation with the other party. Implicitly then, negotiating parties have come to the conclusion, at least for a moment, that they may be able to satisfy their individual goals or concerns more favorably by coming to an agreed upon solution with the other side, than by attempting to meet their goals or concerns unilaterally. It is this mutual perception that leads to the set of negotiations and betrays the dependence that exists (to whatever degree) between negotiating parties.

Negotiation is a method by which people settle differences. It is a process by which compromise or agreement is reached while avoiding argument and dispute.

Specific forms of negotiation are used in many situations: international affairs, the legal system, government, industrial disputes or domestic relationships as examples. However, general negotiation skills can be learned and applied in a wide range of activities.  Negotiation skills can be of great benefit in resolving any differences that arise between you and others.

3.2. Negotiation styles

Before we proceed to explain about the different negotiation styles it is important to note two things. First of all, we need to mention that people tend to prefer a style. This does not mean that they can use other styles. In fact, with practice people can effectively use all five negotiation styles. Second of all, there is no universal best negotiation style. The best style to use differs from negotiation to negotiation.

Accommodating (Lose-Win). Individuals who negotiate with an accommodating style put great accent and emphasis on keeping the relationship. Accommodating profiles think that the route to winning people over is to give them what they want. It is a great style when in negotiation with a recurring party, however, it is less ideal to use when chances are high you will only negotiation once with this party.

Avoiding (Lose-lose). This style is used by parties who dislike negotiation and tend to avoid it. When trapped in a negotiation, parties will tend to concede swiftly and have little initiative. This can be viewed as diplomatic. The downside is that avoiding parties will not be very likely to obtain a satisfactory result in the negotiation. This is also referred to as “passive-aggressive”.

Collaborating (Win-win) Collaborating parties tend to enjoy coming to creative solutions during negotiation. This can potentially lead to positive results or transform simple problems into difficult solutions. Either way, parties that prefer a collaborating style make a real effort to understand the issues of the opposing party of the negotiation. Win-win is about making sure both parties have accomplished their needs and as much mutual value as can be created is created.

Competing (Win-lose). Individuals who prefer the competing style of negotiation see negotiation as a game that must be won at any cost. It is an ideal style when dealing with negotiation where lasting relationships are not very important. They often use all the power and the tactics that they have and their behavior could be aggressive or even psychotic. However, when preservation of the relationship is an issue, the competing style of negotiation is not recommended as the best alternative.

Compromising (Lose some-win some) Parties that value fair and equal deals in negotiation tend to prefer the compromising style. This style tends to get fast results from a negotiation. A pitfall of this style is that concessions often come too fast, without properly discovering the underlying issues. But, what compromising ignores sometimes is that the people that take the most extreme positions tent to get more of what is on offer.

3.3 Negotiation strategies

An effective process includes managing the negotiation’s overall strategy or approach, its stages, and the specific tactics used. Developing negotiation skills is an essential part of moving up the career ladder. Franck Acuff suggests the following 10 negotiation strategies that will work anywhere:

1. Plan the negotiation

2. Adopt a win-win approach

3. Maintain high aspirations

4. Use language that is simple and accessible

5. Ask lots of questions, then listen with your eyes and ears

6. Build solid relationships

7. Maintain personal integrity

8. Converse concessions

9. Be patient

10. Be culturally literate and adapt to the negotiating strategies of the host country environment.

Chapter 4. Key principles and mistakes in negotiation

4.1 Common mistakes in negotiation

All successful managers need to negotiate, whether it's to hammer out the terms of a contract, to gain people's agreement in a meeting, or to agree deadlines with team members.

1. Lacking confidence. Some people think it takes a bold or brazen personality to negotiate a Talking too much is a sure-fire way to kill a deal. In fact, Lewis-Fernandez says it’s not unusual for a salesperson deal, and others think experience is required. "Before you start the process, make sure you’ve identified mutually desirable terms, anticipated possible objections, and determined what motivators or ‘hot buttons’ will resonate with your opponent”.

2. Assuming that something is non-negotiable. When you think like a negotiator, everything is negotiable.

3. Not building relationships first. One of the biggest mistakes individuals make in negotiations is not getting to know their opponent. Slow down and make connections with people and you’ll glean useful information that can be used to identify what they value in life, what motivates them, and what annoys them.

4. Not asking. It sounds simple, but the key to successful negotiations is asking for what you want. Fear of rejection or the fear of looking greedy can get in the way. But know that rejection will happen.

5. Talking too much. Talking too much is a sure-fire way to kill a deal even though some people tend to speak too much and it’s always better to keep it simple.

6. Failing to Prepare. Even if you have a clear idea about what you want from a negotiation, you still need to prepare and rehearse your arguments carefully.

7. Being Afraid to Offend. Trying to secure the best deal for yourself, your team or your organization can be daunting. You may be scared of saying the wrong thing, settling too early, or haggling.

8. Not Listening. You need to listen to the other person to be a successful negotiator. If you talk over him, or ignore what he's saying, it'll be harder to find areas of agreement. You'll also likely "put his back up!

9. Not Knowing Your "BATNA". The term "BATNA" (which stands for "Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement").Essentially, even though your aim in negotiation is to get what you want, you need to decide what your next-best alternative is. This means that you know when it's best to cut your losses and walk away.

10. Caring too Much. You need to care about the outcome of the negotiation, but not so much that you make a bad decision because you feel unable to walk away. In other words, keep your emotions in check, treat the process as a game, and decide when to call it a day.

11. Focusing on Price. Business negotiations are often about money. But if you go into a negotiation process fixated on price – because you want to reduce it or protect it – you risk backing yourself or the other party into a corner.

12. Trying to "Win". Reaching an agreement might be more difficult if you expect to win outright, even if you're entering the negotiation from a position of strength. The most effective negotiation is where both sides leave the table feeling that they've gained something. They may not have everything they wanted, but they have enough for the deal to be worthwhile. It's important not to be greedy.

13. Giving an Ultimatum. If you use the words "This is our best and last offer" in your initial negotiation, there's nowhere else for the discussion to go. Be aware, however, of the difference between giving an ultimatum and setting a deadline. Experienced negotiators often use artificial deadlines to encourage the other party to reach a decision, or to break a deadlock.

4.2 Third-party negotiation. Advantages and disadvantages

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) includes mediation, arbitration, and other ways of resolving conflicts with the help of a specially trained, neutral third party without the need for a formal trial or hearing.

Mediation

In mediation, an outside third party, the mediator, enters the situation with the goal of assisting the parties in reaching an agreement. The mediator can suggest, facilitate, and recommend. The mediator works with both parties to reach a solution but does not represent either side. Rather, the mediator’s role is to help the parties share feelings, air and verify facts, exchange perceptions, and work toward agreements. “Mediation gives the parties the opportunity to discuss the issues raised in the charge, clear up misunderstandings, determine the underlying interests or concerns, find areas of agreement and, ultimately, to incorporate those areas of agreements into resolutions.” A mediator does not solve the charge or impose a decision on the parties. Instead, the mediator helps the parties to agree on a mutually acceptable solution. One of the advantages of mediation is that the mediator helps the parties design their own solutions, including resolving issues that are important for the both of them, not just the ones under specific dispute. Mediation solves a conflict even if no resolution is reached.

In order to find out when you need a mediator you have to ask yourself the answer to the following affirmations. If all of them are on your list, then it is time for a mediator.

The parties aren’t able to find a suitable solution by themselves.

The parties have stopped talking with each other.

The pressure of time is really high and the parties need to get a solution quickly.

Personal differences and values are preventing a successful solution.

Arbitration

In contrast to mediation, in which parties work with the mediator to arrive at a solution, in arbitration the parties submit the dispute to the third-party arbitrator. It is the arbitrator who makes the final decision. The arbitrator is a neutral third party, but the decision made by the arbitrator is final (the decision is called the “award”). Awards are made in writing and are binding to the parties involved in the case.

Arbitration-Mediation

It is a common thing to see mediation followed by arbitration. An alternative technique is to follow the arbitration with mediation. The format of this conflict resolution approach is to have both sides formally make their cases before an arbitrator. The arbitrator then makes a decision and places it in a sealed envelope. Following this, the two parties work through mediation. If they are unable to reach an agreement on their own, the arbitration decisions become binding. Researchers using this technique found that it led to voluntary agreements between the two parties 71% of the time versus 50% for mediation followed by arbitration.

4.3 Success in negotiation (tips)

“A little more persistence, a little more effort, and what seemed hopeless failure may turn to glorious success.” ( Elbert Hubbard). This is why, in order to succeed in a negotiation, you have to apply a series of advice that I have gathered in Figure 4.1. They represent the Dos and don’ts of a successful negotiations.

Figure 4.1 Tips for success in negotiation

4.4 Ethic in negotiation

Are hardball tactics OK to use? Sometimes a course of action is legal but is questionable in terms of ethics. A good rule of thumb is that hardball tactics should not be used because the negotiation is likely not to be the last time you will interact with the other party. Therefore, finding a way to make a deal that works for both sides is preferable. Otherwise, if you have the complete upper hand and use it to “destroy” the other party, it’s likely that at a future date the other party will have the upper hand and will use it to retaliate mercilessly against you. What’s more, your reputation as a negotiator will suffer. Ethics establish a way of doing what is right, fair, and honest. If your counterpart feels you are being unfair or dishonest, he or she is less likely to make any concession, or even to negotiate with you in the first place.

The best 3 tips for an ethical negotiation is to:

Always be honest.

Keep your promises, no matter what

Follow the Golden Rule, which says to treat others the way you want to be treated.

4.5 The connection between conflict and negotiation

The concepts of conflict resolution and negotiation are often discussed together since negotiation can be an important element in resolving a conflict. Conflict resolution typically focuses on bringing two or more conflicted parties together, discussing and exploring the issues behind their conflict, and then finding a resolution to those issues that is satisfactory for all parties. Negotiation is often a part of this process, though other methods can be used, and it involves a procedure by which each party makes compromises and concessions to find a resolution. Therefore, the connection between conflict and negotiation is indeed very tight.

Negotiation is one of the tools that help settling a conflict, but it is also the one with the most creative opportunities, if conflict is managed properly.

Conclusion

The manifestation of conflict can differ from one person to another, depending on people perception, attitudes, values, personality and culture. It can lead from minor divergences to violent situations. But, although conflict has different manifestations, it can be managed, because nowadays the researchers have found new ways of keeping it under control. Conflict can be handled by a number of methods, each with varying degrees of cooperation and competitiveness. Different situations require a different solution.

I reached the conclusion that, even though conflict is bad for the organizational development, it can increase creativity and innovation, and it can bring organizations to a higher level, when its managed properly.

Negotiations occur during many important processes, in the organizational environment and knowing negation skills can be an incredible tool. In my opinion, a key component to negotiations involves having a BATNA, which is “best alternative to a negotiated agreement.”

During a negotiation, it is important to avoid mistake, such as: lacking confidence, assuming that something is non-negotiable, not building relationship first, not asking, talking too much, failing to prepare, not listening, not knowing with who are you dealing with, overthinking about winning, giving an ultimatum, focusing too much on price, etc.

It is also important to keep in mind that culture plays a very important role in choosing preferential methods, in order to handle conflict and negotiation. Every individual should understand the cultural background of others, so that they can manage more effectively a conflict that could otherwise become a problematic situation.

The international negotiations are much more complex than the ones from our daily life. The main reason lies in the differences in negotiators’ cultures. These differences have a great impact on negotiators’ behavior and in international negotiation become even intensified by the perception of the participants. As demonstrated by various research results, the differences in cultures are manifested in distinct differences between negotiating styles typical for these cultures. This does not mean that all members of a particular culture negotiate in the same way but rather that there are patterns of behavior which are typical for most of them.

To succeed in the international negotiation arena, negotiators need to develop high sensitivity to cultural factors and to identify and pursue a culturally responsive strategy. Most appropriate in a given negotiation, is setting, but at the same time acknowledge, and consider also individual and structural aspects occurring in this setting.

Negotiation is one of the tools that help settling a conflict, I would even say that also one with the most creative opportunities. Negotiators have well-recognized interests in the outcome, either in getting a settlement. It is always better to try negotiating the conflict first than give it away and let an arbitrator decide about a solution.

Although it is not always possible, conflict can give a chance to focus on a problem and preserve the relationship. Sometimes it is wise to engage a third-party inviting a mediator into play. We should keep in mind that the less costly solution is one that is focused on joint problem solving – interests. Focusing on interests, compared to focusing on rights or power, tends to produce higher satisfaction with outcomes, better working relationships and less recurrence. Regardless of the level, conflict management and negotiation tactics are important skills that can be learned.

In conclusion, managing conflict and engaging in effective negotiation are both key for effective organizational behavior within organizations as well as daily life.

Bibliography

Books:

Andrzej A. Huczynski and David A. Buchanan, “Organizational Behavior”, Financial Times Prentice Hall, 2013 (eighth edition)

David Buchanan and Andrezej Huczynski, “Organizational Behavior”, 1996 (third edition)

Greenberg J. and R. Baron, “Behavior in Organizations-Understanding and Managing the Human side of Work, Pretince-Hall, 1997

John A. Wagner and John R. Hollenbeck, “Organizational Behavior”, Routledge, 2014 (second edition)

Stephen P. Robbins, “Organizational Behavior”, Prentice-Hall, 2002

Talya Bauer and Berrin Erdogan, “An Introduction to Organizational Behavior”, 2012

Online sources:

http://tafrih.in/more/5960757_13/Handle-Conflict-and-Negotiation-2012.html

http://docplayer.net/5551716-Managing-conflict-and-negotiation.html

http://documents.mx/documents/conflict-final-1.html

http://www.ukessays.com/dissertation/examples/business/productivity-and-efficiency-for-organizational-goals.php

http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/an-introduction-to-organizational-behavior-v1.0/s14-02-causes-and-outcomes-of-conflic.html

https://new.edu/resources/when-all-else-fails-third-party-negotiations

http://www.mbaofficial.com/mba/mba-courses/human-resource-management/management-of-conflict/

https://new.edu/resources/ethics-and-negotiations

http://www.negotiationtraining.com.au/questions/conflict-and-negotiation/

http://convergemagazine.com/conflict-not-always-a-bad-thing-14912/