Conflict and Negotiation in Groups

118 PART THREE The Group
CHAPTER 15
Conflict and
Negotiation
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, students should be able to:
1. Define conflict.
2. Differentiate between the traditional, human relations, and interactionist views of conflict.
. !utline the conflict process.
". Define negotiation.
#. $ontrast distributive and integrative bargaining.
%. Apply the five steps of the negotiation process.
&. 'how how individual differences influence negotiations.
(. Assess the roles and functions of third)party negotiations.
*. Describe cultural differences in negotiations.
Instructor Resources
+nstructors may wish to use the following resources when presenting this chapter:
PowerPoint Slides, $hapter 1#
Text Exercises
o ,-T. !/ '$+01$02 When Sellin in !n A"ction# St!rt the Biddin $ih% 3p. "*(4
o +1T0/1AT+!1A5 !6 Neoti!tin Across C"lt"res 3p. #74
o !6 +1 T.0 108' 9,arriage $ounseling: for the Top 6osses 3p. #7"4
o ;!+1T<$!=1T0/;!+1T Con&lict Bene&its Or!ni'!tions 3p. #7(4
o Experiential Exercise A Negotiation Role Play 3pp. #7*>#174
o Ethical Dilemma Is It Unethical to Lie and Deceive During Negotiations? 3p. #174
Text C!ses
o $ase +ncident 1 David !ut)1egotiating Goliath: Apote? and 6ristol),yers '@uibb 3pp. #17
)#114
o $ase +ncident 2 1egotiation ;uts .ocAey in the ;enalty 6o? 3pp. #11>#124
+nstructor /esource $enter
Instr"ctor(s Choice
o Neoti!tin with the N!tion!l L!)or Rel!tions Bo!rd
This section presents an e?ercise that is 1!T found in the studentBs te?tbooA.
Instructors !hoice reinforces the te?tBs emphasis through various activities.
'ome Instructors !hoice activities are centered around debates, group
e?ercises, +nternet research, and student e?periences. 'ome can be used in)
class in their entirety, while others re@uire some additional worA on the studentBs
part. The course instructor may choose to use these at anytime throughout the
Co*+riht ,-../ Pe!rson Ed"c!tion# Inc0 *")lishin !s Prentice $!ll
119 PART THREE The Group
classCsome may be more effective as icebreaAers, while some may be used to
pull together various concepts covered in the chapter.
WEB
EXERCIE
At the end of each chapter of this instructorDs manual, you will find suggested e?ercises
and ideas for researching the 888 on !6 topics. The e?ercises 90?ploring !6 Topics on
the 8eb: are set up so that you can simply photocopy the pages, distribute them to your
class, and maAe assignments accordingly. -ou may want to assign the e?ercises as an
out)of)class activity or as lab activities with your class.
Summary and Implications for Managers
,any people automatically assume that conflict is related to lower group and organiEational performance.
This chapter has demonstrated that this assumption is fre@uently incorrect. $onflict can be either
constructive or destructive to the functioning of a group or unit. As shown in 0?hibit 1#)( on page #7% of
the te?tbooA, levels of conflict can be either too high or too low. 0ither e?treme hinders performance. An
optimal level is one at which there is enough conflict to prevent stagnation, stimulate creativity, allow
tensions to be released, and initiate the seeds for change, yet not so much as to be disruptive or to deter
coordination of activities.
8hat advice can we give managers faced with e?cessive conflict and the need to reduce it2 DonDt
assume that one conflict)handling intention will always be bestF -ou should select an intention appropriate
for the situation. The following are some guidelines:
1
=se competition when @uicA, decisive action is vital 3in emergencies4, on important issues,
where unpopular actions need to be implemented 3in cost cutting, enforcing unpopular rules,
discipline4, on issues vital to the organiEationDs welfare when you Anow youDre rights and
against people who taAe advantage of noncompetitive behavior.
=se colla"oration to find an integrative solution when both sets of concerns are too important
to be compromised, when your obGective is to learn, to merge insights from people with
different perspectives, to gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus, and
to worA through feelings that have interfered with a relationship.
=se avoidance when an issue is trivial or when more important issues are pressing, when
you perceive no chance of satisfying your concerns, when potential disruption outweighs the
benefits of resolution, to let people cool down and regain perspective, when gathering
information supersedes immediate decision, when others can resolve the conflict more
effectively, and when issues seem tangential or symptomatic of other issues.
=se accommodation when you find that youDre wrong and to allow a better position to be
heard, to learn, and to show your reasonablenessH when issues are more important to others
than to yourself and to satisfy others and maintain cooperationH to build social credits for later
issuesH to minimiEe loss when you are outmatched and losingH when harmony and stability
are especially importantH and to allow employees to develop by learning from mistaAes.
=se compromise when goals are important but not worth the effort of potential disruption of
more assertive approachesH when opponents with e@ual power are committed to mutually
e?clusive goalsH to achieve temporary settlements to comple? issuesH to arrive at e?pedient
solutions under time pressureH and as a bacAup when collaboration or competition is
unsuccessful.
1egotiation is an ongoing activity in groups and organiEations. Distributive bargaining can resolve
C$APTER 12 $onflict and 1egotiation
disputes, but it often negatively affects the satisfaction of one or more negotiators because it is focused
on the short term and because it is confrontational. +ntegrative bargaining, in contrast, tends to provide
outcomes that satisfy all parties and that build lasting relationships. 8hen engaged in negotiation, maAe
sure you set aggressive goals and try to find creative ways to achieve the goals of both parties, especially
when you value the long)term relationship with the other party. That doesnDt mean 9giving in: on your self)
interestH rather, it means trying to find creative solutions that give both parties what they really want.
#he chapter opens "y sho$ing ho$ Nelson Pelt%& !E' of #rain (und )anagement L*P*&
created conflict at the +ein% corporation "y "uying ,- of +ein% shares of stoc. and
ac/uiring a set on the 0oard of Directors* 1hen he "egan lo""ying for changes in the
company to raise the slumping stic. price& he met $ith resistance* 1hether due to this
conflict or not& the stic. price has increased roughly 22 #he conflicting styles of Pelt% and
other "oard mem"ers provide an illustrative introduction to this chapter3s material*
Brief C!a"ter #utline
+. A D0I+1+T+!1 !I $!1I5+$T 3;;T 1#>24
8e define conflict as 9a process that begins when one party perceives that
another party has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the
first party cares about.:
++. T/A1'+T+!1' +1 $!1I5+$T T.!=G.T 3;;Ts 1#> and 1#>"4
A. The Traditional Jiew
This early approach assumed that all conflict was bad. 6y definition, it was
harmful and was to be avoided.
This view was consistent with the prevailing attitudes about group behavior in the
1*7s and 1*"7s. $onflict was seen as a dysfunctional outcome resulting from
poor communication, a lacA of openness and trust between people, and the
failure of managers to be responsive to their employees.
6. The .uman /elations Jiew
$onflict is a natural occurrence in all groups and organiEations.
The human relations view dominated conflict theory from the late 1*"7s through
the mid)1*&7s.
$. The +nteractionist Jiew
The +nteractionist view is the one taAen in this chapter.
This approach encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious, peaceful,
tran@uil, and cooperative group is prone to becoming static and non)responsive
to needs for change and innovation.
8hether a conflict is good or bad depends on the type of conflict. 3;;Ts 1#>#
and 1#>%4
o 1ot all conflicts are good. Iunctional, constructive forms of conflict
support the goals of the group and improve its performance. $onflicts
that hinder group performance are dysfunctional or destructive forms of
conflict.
#as. conflict relates to the content and goals of the worA. 5ow)to)
moderate levels of tasA conflict are functional.
Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships.
These conflicts are almost always dysfunctional.
Process conflict relates to how the worA gets done. 5ow levels of
process conflict are functional and could enhance team
performance.
1$%
1$1 PART THREE The Group
+++. T.0 $!1I5+$T ;/!$0'' 3;;Ts 1#>& to 1#>14
A. 'tage +: ;otential !pposition or +ncompatibility
1. $ommunication
$ommunication as a source of conflict represents those opposing forces
that arise from semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and 9noise: in
the communication channels.
2. 'tructure
'iEe and specialiEation act as forces to stimulate conflict. The larger the
group and more specialiEed its activities, the greater the liAelihood of
conflict.
. ;ersonal Jariables
+nclude individual value systems and personality characteristics. $ertain
personality types lead to potential conflict.
,ost important is differing value systems. Jalue differences are the best
e?planation for differences of opinion on various matters.
6. 'tage ++: $ognition and ;ersonaliEation
$onflict is personaliEed when it is felt and when individuals become emotionally
involved.
This stage is where conflict issues tend to be defined and this definition
delineates the possible settlements.
'econd, emotions play a maGor role in shaping perceptions.
$. 'tage +++: +ntentions
1. +ntroduction
+ntentions are decisions to act in a given way.
;rimary conflict)handling intentions are represented in 0?hibit 1#>2 along
two dimensions:
o !ooperativenessC9the degree to which one party attempts to
satisfy the other partyDs concerns.:
o AssertivenessC9the degree to which one party attempts to
satisfy his or her own concerns.:
Iive conflict)handling intentions can be identified: competing,
collaborating, avoiding, accommodating, and compromising.
2. $ompeting
. $ollaborating
". Avoiding
#. Accommodating
%. $ompromising
D. 'tage +J: 6ehavior
'tage +J is where conflicts become visible.
'tage +J is a dynamic process of interactionH conflicts e?ist somewhere along a
continuum.
0?hibit 1#>" lists the maGor resolution and stimulation techni@ues.
0. 'tage J: !utcomes
1. +ntroduction
!utcomes may be functionalCimproving group performance, or
dysfunctional in hindering it.
2. Iunctional !utcomes
$onflict is constructive when it:
o +mproves the @uality of decisions.
o 'timulates creativity and innovation.
o 0ncourages interest and curiosity.
$onflict is an antidote for groupthinA.
1$$
1$& PART THREE The Group
o +ncreasing cultural diversity of the worAforce should provide
benefits to organiEations.
. Dysfunctional !utcomes
=ndesirable conse@uences:
o A retarding of communication
o /eductions in group cohesiveness
o 'ubordination of group goals to the primacy of infighting between
members
". $reating Iunctional $onflict
+f managers accept the interactionist view toward conflict, they
encourage functional conflict.
+J. 10G!T+AT+!1 3;;Ts 1#>1" to 1#>1*4
A. +ntroduction
Negotiation is a 9process in which two or more parties e?change goods or
services and attempt to agree upon the e?change rate for them.: 8e use the
terms negotiation and "argaining interchangeably.
6. 6argaining 'trategies
1. Distributive Tactics
+ts most identifying feature is that it operates under Eero)sum conditions.
Any gain + maAe is at your e?pense, and vice versa.
The most widely cited e?ample of distributive bargaining is in labor)
management negotiations over wages.
2. +ntegrative Tactics
+ntegrative bargaining builds long)term relationships and facilitates
worAing together in the futureH it bonds negotiators and allows each to
leave the bargaining table feeling victorious.
Distributive bargaining, on the other hand, leaves one party a loser. +t
tends to build animosities and deepens divisions.
$. The 1egotiation ;rocess
1. ;reparation and ;lanning:
Do your homeworA.
Determine your and the other sideDs 6est Alternative To a 1egotiated
Agreement 36AT1A4.
2. Definition of Ground /ules:
8ho will do the negotiating2 8here will it taAe place2 8hat time
constraints, if any, will apply2
. $larification and Kustification:
8hen initial positions have been e?changed, e?plain, amplify, clarify,
bolster, and Gustify your original demands.
". 6argaining and ;roblem 'olving:
The essence of the negotiation process is the actual give)and)taAe in trying
to hash out an agreement.
#. $losure and +mplementation:
The final stepCformaliEing the agreement that has been worAed out and
developing any procedures that are necessary for implementation and
monitoring
D. +ssues in 1egotiation
1. The /ole of ,ood and ;ersonality Traits in 1egotiation
!verall assessments of the personality)negotiation relationship find that
personality traits have no significant direct effect on either the bargaining
process or negotiation outcomes.
2. Gender Differences in 1egotiations
,en and women do not negotiate differently.
1$'
The belief that women are 9nicer: is probably due to confusing gender
and the lacA of power typically held by women.
8omenDs attitudes toward negotiation and toward themselves appear to
be different from menDs.
. $ultural Differences in 1egotiations
1egotiating styles clearly vary across national cultures.
The Irench liAe conflict.
The $hinese also draw out negotiations but that is because they believe
negotiations never end.
Americans are Anown around the world for their impatience and their
desire to be liAed.
The cultural conte?t of the negotiation significantly influences the amount
and type of preparation for bargaining, the emphasis on tasA versus
interpersonal relationships, the tactics used, etc.
". Third);arty 1egotiations
A mediator is a neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by
using reasoning and persuasion, suggesting alternatives, and the liAe.
An ar"itrator is 9a third party with the authority to dictate an agreement.:
A conciliator is 9a trusted third party who provides an informal
communication linA among parties.:
A consultant is 9a sAilled and impartial third party who attempts to
facilitate problem solving through communication and analysis, aided by
his or her Anowledge of conflict management.:
J. '=,,A/- A1D +,;5+$AT+!1' I!/ ,A1AG0/'
A. $onflict can be either constructive or destructive
6. +nade@uate or e?cessive conflict
/educed satisfaction
+ncreased absenteeism
5ower productivity
$. !ptimal conflict
Decreases apathy
+ncreases motivation
D. .andling conflict
$ompetition
$ollaboration
Avoidance
Accommodation
$ompromise
0 1egotiation
Distributive bargaining
E("anded C!a"ter #utline
+. A D0I+1+T+!1 !I $!1I5+$T
There are several common themes which underlie most definitions:
o The parties to it must perceive conflict.
o $ommonalties in the definitions are opposition or incompatibility and some form
of interaction.
8e define conflict as 9a process that begins when one party perceives that another party
has negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party
cares about.:
o This describes that point when an interaction 9crosses over: to become an inter)
party conflict.
o +t encompasses the wide range of conflicts that people e?perience in
organiEations.
++. T/A1'+T+!1' +1 $!1I5+$T T.!=G.T
A. The Traditional Jiew
The traditional view of conflict argues that it must be avoidedCit
indicates a malfunctioning with the group.
This early approach assumed that all conflict was bad. $onflict was
synonymous with such terms that reinforced its negative connotation. 6y
definition, it was harmful and was to be avoided.
This view was consistent with the prevailing attitudes about group
behavior in the 1*7s and 1*"7s. $onflict was seen as a dysfunctional outcome
resulting from poor communication, a lacA of openness and trust between
people, and the failure of managers to be responsive to their employees.
6. The .uman /elations Jiew
The human relations view argues that conflict is a natural and inevitable
outcome in any group and that it need not be evil, but has the potential to be a
positive force in determining group performance.
$onflict is a natural occurrence in all groups and organiEations. 'ince it
was natural and inevitable it should be accepted.
+t cannot be eliminated and may even contribute to group performance.
The human relations view dominated conflict theory from the late 1*"7s through
the mid)1*&7s.
$. The +nteractionist Jiew
The interactionist approach proposes that conflict can be a positive force
in a group but e?plicitly argues that some conflict is absolutely necessary for a
group to perform effectively.
The +nteractionist view is the one taAen in this chapter.
This approach encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious,
peaceful, tran@uil, and cooperative group is prone to becoming static and non)
responsive to needs for change and innovation.
Group leaders maintain enough conflict to Aeep the group viable, self)
critical, and creative.
8hether a conflict is good or bad depends on the type of conflict.
o 1ot all conflicts are good. Iunctional, constructive forms of conflict
support the goals of the group and improve its performance. $onflicts
that hinder group performance are dysfunctional or destructive forms of
conflict.
o 8hat differentiates functional from dysfunctional conflict2 -ou need to
looA at the type of conflict.
#as. conflict relates to the content and goals of the worA. 5ow)to)
moderate levels of tasA conflict are functional and consistently
demonstrate a positive effect on group performance because it
stimulates discussion, improving group performance.
Relationship conflict focuses on interpersonal relationships.
These conflicts are almost always dysfunctional.
The friction and interpersonal hostilities inherent in
relationship conflicts increase personality clashes and
decrease mutual understanding.
1$)
1$* PART THREE The Group
Process conflict relates to how the worA gets done.
5ow)levels of process conflict are functional and could
enhance team performance.
Ior process conflict to be productive, it must be Aept low.
+ntense arguments create uncertainty.
+++. T.0 $!1I5+$T ;/!$0''
A. 'tage +: ;otential !pposition or +ncompatibility
1. $ommunication
$ommunication as a source of conflict represents those opposing forces
that arise from semantic difficulties, misunderstandings, and 9noise: in
the communication channels.
Differing word connotations, Gargon, insufficient e?change of information,
and noise in the communication channel are all barriers to
communication and potential antecedents to conflict.
'emantic difficulties are a result of differences in training, selective
perception, and inade@uate information.
The potential for conflict increases when either too little or too much
communication taAes place.
The channel chosen for communicating can have an influence on
stimulating opposition.
2. 'tructure
The term structure includes variables such as siEe, degree of
specialiEation, Gurisdictional clarity, member)goal compatibility, leadership
styles, reward systems, and the degree of dependence.
'iEe and specialiEation act as forces to stimulate conflict. The larger the
group and more specialiEed its activities, the greater the liAelihood of
conflict.
The potential for conflict is greatest where group members are younger
and turnover is high.
The greater the ambiguity in responsibility for actions lies, the greater the
potential for conflict.
The diversity of goals among groups is a maGor source of conflict.
A close style of leadership increases conflict potential.
Too much reliance on participation may also stimulate conflict.
/eward systems, too, are found to create conflict when one memberDs
gain is at anotherDs e?pense.
Iinally, if a group is dependent on another group, opposing forces are
stimulated.
. ;ersonal Jariables
+nclude individual value systems and personality characteristics. $ertain
personality types lead to potential conflict.
,ost important is differing value systems. Jalue differences are the best
e?planation for differences of opinion on various matters.
Teaching Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce ,-T.
!/ '$+01$02 41hen 5elling in an Auction& 5tart the 0idding +igh6 found in the
te?t and at the end of this chapter. A suggestion for a class e?ercise follows. L
6. 'tage ++: $ognition and ;ersonaliEation
Antecedent conditions lead to conflict only when the parties are affected by and
aware of it.
$onflict is personaliEed when it is felt and when individuals become emotionally
involved.
This stage is where conflict issues tend to be defined and this definition
delineates the possible settlements.
'econd, emotions play a maGor role in shaping perceptions.
o 1egative emotions produce oversimplification of issues, reductions in
trust, and negative interpretations of the other partyDs behavior.
o ;ositive feelings increase the tendency to see potential relationships
among the elements of a problem, to taAe a broader view of the situation,
and to develop more innovative solutions.
$. 'tage +++: +ntentions
1. +ntroduction
+ntentions are decisions to act in a given way.
8hy are intentions separated out as a distinct stage2 ,erely one party
attributing the wrong intentions to the other escalates a lot of conflicts.
!ne authorDs effort to identify the primary conflict)handling intentions is
represented in 0?hibit 1#>2 is along two dimensions:
o !ooperativenessC9the degree to which one party attempts to
satisfy the other partyDs concerns.:
o AssertivenessC9the degree to which one party attempts to
satisfy his or her own concerns.:
Iive conflict)handling intentions can be identified: competing,
collaborating, avoiding, accommodating, and compromising.
2. $ompeting
8hen one person seeAs to satisfy his or her own interests, regardless of
the impact on the other parties to the conflict
. $ollaborating
8hen the parties to conflict each desire to fully satisfy the concerns of all
parties. The intention is to solve the problem by clarifying differences
rather than by accommodating.
". Avoiding
A person may recogniEe that a conflict e?ists and want to withdraw from
it or suppress it.
#. Accommodating
8hen one party seeAs to appease an opponent, that party is willing to be
self)sacrificing.
%. $ompromising
8hen each party to the conflict seeAs to give up something, sharing
occurs, resulting in a compromised outcome. There is no clear winner or
loser, and the solution provides incomplete satisfaction of both partiesD
concerns.
+ntentions provide general guidelines for parties in a conflict situation.
They define each partyDs purpose, but they are not fi?ed.
o They might change because of reconceptualiEation or because
of an emotional reaction.
o .owever, individuals have preferences among the five conflict)
handling intentions.
o +t may be more appropriate to view the five conflict)handling
intentions as relatively fi?ed rather than as a set of options from
which individuals choose to fit an appropriate situation.
1$8
D. 'tage +J: 6ehavior
'tage +J is where conflicts become visible. The behavior stage includes the
statements, actions, and reactions made by the conflicting parties. These conflict
behaviors are usually overt attempts to implement each partyDs intentions.
'tage +J is a dynamic process of interactionH conflicts e?ist somewhere along a
continuum.
At the lower part of the continuum, conflicts are characteriEed by subtle, indirect,
and highly controlled forms of tension.
$onflict intensities escalate as they move upward along the continuum until they
become highly destructive.
Iunctional conflicts are typically confined to the lower range of the continuum.
0?hibit 1#>" lists the maGor resolution and stimulation techni@ues.
0. 'tage J: !utcomes
1. +ntroduction
!utcomes may be functionalCimproving group performance, or
dysfunctional in hindering it.
2. Iunctional !utcomes
.ow might conflict act as a force to increase group performance2
$onflict is constructive when it:
o +mproves the @uality of decisions.
o 'timulates creativity and innovation.
o 0ncourages interest and curiosity.
o ;rovides the medium through which problems can be aired and
tensions released.
o Iosters an environment of self)evaluation and change.
The evidence suggests that conflict can improve the @uality of decision
maAing.
o $onflict is an antidote for groupthinA.
o $onflict challenges the status @uo, furthers the creation of new
ideas, promotes reassessment of group goals and activities, and
increases the probability that the group will respond to change.
o /esearch studies in diverse settings confirm the functionality of
conflict.
The comparison of si? maGor decisions made during the
administration of four different =.'. presidents found that
conflict reduced the chance of groupthinA.
8hen groups analyEed decisions that had been made by
the individual members of that group, the average
improvement among the high)conflict groups was &
percent greater than was that of those groups
characteriEed by low)conflict conditions.
o +ncreasing cultural diversity of the worAforce should provide
benefits to organiEations.
.eterogeneity among group and organiEation members
can increase creativity, improve the @uality of decisions,
and facilitate change by enhancing member fle?ibility.
The ethnically diverse groups produced more effective
and more feasible ideas and higher @uality, uni@ue ideas
than those produced by the all)Anglo group.
'imilarly, studies of professionalsCsystems analysts and research and
development scientistsCsupport the constructive value of conflict.
An investigation of 22 teams of systems analysts found that the more
incompatible groups were liAely to be more productive.
/esearch and development scientists have been found to be most
productive where there is a certain amount of intellectual conflict.
. Dysfunctional !utcomes
=ncontrolled opposition breeds discontent, which acts to dissolve
common ties and eventually leads to the destruction of the group.
=ndesirable conse@uences:
o A retarding of communication
o /eductions in group cohesiveness
o 'ubordination of group goals to the primacy of infighting between
members
$onflict can bring group functioning to a halt and potentially threaten the
groupDs survival.
1&%
1&1 PART THREE The Group
The demise of an organiEation as a result of too much conflict is not as
unusual as it might first appear. !ne of 1ew -orADs best)Anown law firms,
'hea M Gould, closed down solely because the (7 partners Gust could not
get along.
". $reating Iunctional $onflict
+f managers accept the interactionist view toward conflict, they
encourage functional conflict.
$reating functional conflict is a tough Gob, particularly in large American
corporations.
A high proportion of people who get to the top are conflict avoiders.
At least seven out of ten people in American business hush up when
their opinions are at odds with those of their superiors, allowing bosses
to maAe mistaAes even when they Anow better.
'uch anti)conflict cultures are not tolerable in todayDs fiercely competitive
global economy.
This process fre@uently results in decisions and alternatives that
previously had not been considered.
!ne common ingredient in organiEations that successfully create
functional conflict is that they reward dissent and punish conflict
avoiders.
The real challenge for managers is when they hear news that they do not
want to hear.
,anagers should asA calm, even)tempered @uestions, such as: !an you
tell me more a"out $hat happened? or 1hat do you thin. $e ought to
do? They should also offer a sincere 9ThanA you.
Teaching Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce
;!+1T<$!=1T0/;!+1T: !onflict 0enefits 'rgani%ations found in the te?t and
at the end of this chapter. A suggestion for a class discussion follows. L
OR
Teaching Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the $A'0
+1$+D01T 1: David !ut)1egotiating Goliath: Apote? and 6ristol),yers '@uibb
found in the te?t and at the end of this chapter. Nuestions for students to answer
follow. L
+J. 10G!T+AT+!1
A. +ntroduction
Negotiation is a 9process in which two or more parties e?change goods or services
and attempt to agree upon the e?change rate for them.: 8e use the terms
negotiation and "argaining interchangeably.
1egotiation permeates the interactions of almost everyone in groups and
organiEations. Ior e?ample, labor bargains with management.
1ot so obvious, however, managers negotiate with employees, peers, and bosses.
'alespeople negotiate with customers.
;urchasing agents negotiate with suppliers.
A worAer agrees to answer a colleagueDs phone for a few minutes in e?change for
some past or future benefit.
6. 6argaining 'trategies
1. Distributive Tactics
An e?ample of distributive bargaining is buying a car:
o -ou go out to see the car. +t is great and you want it.
o The owner tells you the asAing price. -ou do not want to pay that
much.
o The two of you then negotiate over the price.
+ts most identifying feature is that it operates under Eero)sum conditions.
Any gain + maAe is at your e?pense, and vice versa.
The most widely cited e?ample of distributive bargaining is in labor)
management negotiations over wages.
The essence of distributive bargaining is depicted in 0?hibit 1#>%.
o ;arties A and 6 represent two negotiators.
o 0ach has a target point that defines what he or she would liAe to
achieve.
o 0ach also has a resistance point, which marAs the lowest
outcome that is acceptable.
o The area between these two points maAes up each oneDs
aspiration range.
o As long as there is some overlap between A and 6Ds aspiration
ranges, there e?ists a settlement range where each oneDs
aspirations can be met.
8hen engaged in distributive bargaining, oneDs tactics focus on trying to
get oneDs opponent to agree to oneDs specific target point or to get as
close to it as possible.
Teaching Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce !6 +1
T.0 108': 9,arriage $ounseling: for the Top 6osses found in the te?t and at
the end of this chapter. A suggestion for a class e?ercise follows. L
2. +ntegrative Tactics
An e?ample: A sales rep calls in the order and is told that the firm cannot
approve credit to this customer because of a past slow)pay record.
o The ne?t day, the sales rep and the firmDs credit manager meet to
discuss the problem. They want to maAe the sale, but do not
want to get stucA with uncollectible debt.
o The two openly review their options.
o After considerable discussion, they agree on a solution that
meets both their needs. The sale will go through with a banA
guarantee that will ensure payment if not made in %7 days.
This e?ample operates under the assumption that there
e?ists one or more settlements that can create a win)win
solution.
+n terms of intra)organiEational behavior, all things being
e@ual, integrative bargaining is preferable to distributive
bargaining.
6ecause integrative bargaining builds long)term
relationships and facilitates worAing together in the
future, it bonds negotiators and allows each to leave the
bargaining table feeling victorious.
Distributive bargaining, on the other hand, leaves one
party a loser. +t tends to build animosities and deepens
divisions.
1&$
1&& PART THREE The Group
8hy do we not see more integrative bargaining in organiEations2 The
answer lies in the conditions necessary for this type of negotiation to
succeed.
o ;arties who are open with information and candid about their
concerns
o A sensitivity by both parties to the otherDs needs
o The ability to trust one another
o A willingness by both parties to maintain fle?ibility
Teaching Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the
0T.+$A5 D+50,,A: Is It Unethical to Lie& Deceive or !ollude During
Negotiations? found in the te?t and at the end of this chapter. A suggestion for a
class e?ercise follows. L
$. The 1egotiation ;rocess
1. ;reparation and ;lanning
Do your homeworA. 8hat is the nature of the conflict2 8hat is the history
leading up to this negotiation2 8ho is involved, and what are their
perceptions of the conflict2 8hat do you want from the negotiation2
8hat are your goals2
-ou also want to prepare an assessment of what you thinA the other
party to your negotiationDs goals are.
o 8hen you can anticipate your opponentDs position, you are better
e@uipped to counter his or her arguments with the facts and
figures that support your position.
!nce you have gathered your information, use it to develop a strategy.
Determine your and the other sideDs 6est Alternative To a 1egotiated
Agreement 36AT1A4.
-our 6AT1A determines the lowest value acceptable to you for a
negotiated agreement.
Any offer you receive that is higher than your 6AT1A is better than an
impasse.
2. Definition of Ground /ules
8ho will do the negotiating2 8here will it taAe place2 8hat time
constraints, if any, will apply2
To what issues will negotiation be limited2 8ill there be a specific
procedure to follow if an impasse is reached2
During this phase, the parties will also e?change their initial proposals or
demands.
. $larification and Kustification
8hen initial positions have been e?changed, e?plain, amplify, clarify,
bolster, and Gustify your original demands.
This need not be confrontational.
-ou might want to provide the other party with any documentation that
helps support your position.
". 6argaining and ;roblem 'olving
The essence of the negotiation process is the actual give)and)taAe in
trying to hash out an agreement.
$oncessions will undoubtedly need to be made by both parties.
#. $losure and +mplementation
The final stepCformaliEing the agreement that has been worAed out and
developing any procedures that are necessary for implementation and
monitoring
,aGor negotiations will re@uire hammering out the specifics in a formal
contract.
Ior most cases, however, closure of the negotiation process is nothing
more formal than a handshaAe.
D. +ssues in 1egotiation
1. The /ole of ,ood and ;ersonality Traits in 1egotiation
$an you predict an opponentDs negotiating tactics if you Anow something
about his<her personality2 The evidence says no.
!verall assessments of the personality)negotiation relationship find that
personality traits have no significant direct effect on either the bargaining
process or negotiation outcomes.
2. Gender Differences in 1egotiations
,en and women do not negotiate differently.
A popular stereotype is that women are more cooperative, pleasant, and
relationship)oriented in negotiations than are men. The evidence does
not support this.
$omparisons between e?perienced male and female managers find
women are:
o 1either worse nor better negotiators.
o 1either more cooperative nor open to the other.
o 1either more nor less persuasive nor threatening than are men.
o The belief that women are 9nicer: is probably due to confusing
gender and the lacA of power typically held by women.
5ow)power managers, regardless of gender, attempt to
placate their opponents and to use softly persuasive
tactics rather than direct confrontation and threats.
8omenDs attitudes toward negotiation and toward themselves appear to
be different from menDs.
,anagerial women demonstrate less confidence in anticipation of
negotiating and are less satisfied with their performance despite
achieving similar outcomes as men.
8omen may unduly penaliEe themselves by failing to engage in
negotiations when such action would be in their best interests
. $ultural Differences in 1egotiations
1egotiating styles clearly vary across national cultures.
The Irench liAe conflict.
o They gain recognition and develop their reputations by thinAing
and acting against others.
o They tend to taAe a long time in negotiating agreements, and
they are not overly concerned about whether their opponents liAe
or disliAe them.
The $hinese also draw out negotiations but that is because they believe
negotiations never end.
o Kust when you thinA you have reached a final solution, the
$hinese e?ecutive might smile and start the process all over
again.
o 5iAe the Kapanese, the $hinese negotiate to develop a
relationship and a commitment to worA together.
o Americans are Anown around the world for their impatience and
their desire to be liAed.
o Astute negotiators often turn these characteristics to their
advantage.
1&'
The cultural conte?t of the negotiation significantly influences the amount
and type of preparation for bargaining, the emphasis on tasA versus
interpersonal relationships, the tactics used, etc.
A study compared 1orth Americans, Arabs, and /ussians negotiating
style, how they responded to an opponentDs arguments, their approach to
maAing concessions, and how they handled negotiating deadlines.
o 1orth Americans tried to persuade others by relying on facts and
appealing to logic.
They made small concessions early in the negotiation to
establish a relationship and usually reciprocated the
opponentDs concessions.
1orth Americans treated deadlines as very important.
o The Arabs tried to persuade by appealing to emotion.
They countered opponentDs arguments with subGective
feelings.
They made concessions throughout the bargaining
process and almost always reciprocated opponentsD
concessions.
Arabs approached deadlines very casually.
o The /ussians based their arguments on asserted ideals.
They made few, if any, concessions.
Any concession offered by an opponent was viewed as
a weaAness and almost never reciprocated.
Iinally, the /ussians tended to ignore deadlines.
A second study looAed at verbal and nonverbal negotiation tactics
e?hibited by 1orth Americans, Kapanese, and 6raEilians during half)hour
bargaining sessions.
o 6raEilians on average said 91o: ( times compared to five times
for the Kapanese and nine times for the 1orth Americans.
o The Kapanese displayed more than five periods of silence lasting
longer than ten seconds during the 7)minute sessions.
o 1orth Americans averaged .# such periodsH the 6raEilians had
none.
o The same number of times, but the 6raEilians interrupted 2.# to
times more often
o Iinally, while the Kapanese and the 1orth Americans had no
physical contact with their opponents during negotiations e?cept
for handshaAing, the 6raEilians touched each other almost five
times every half)hour.
". Third);arty 1egotiations
8hen individuals or group representatives reach a stalemate and are
unable to resolve their differences through direct negotiations, they may
turn to a third party.
A mediator is a neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by
using reasoning and persuasion, suggesting alternatives, and the liAe.
o They are widely used in labor)management negotiations and in
civil court disputes.
o Their settlement rate is appro?imately %7 percent, with negotiator
satisfaction at about &# percent.
o The Aey to successCthe conflicting parties must be motivated to
bargain and resolve their conflict, intensity cannot be too high,
and the mediator must be perceived as neutral and noncoercive.
An ar"itrator is 9a third party with the authority to dictate an agreement.:
o +t can be voluntary 3re@uested4 or compulsory 3forced on the
parties by law or contract4.
o The authority of the arbitrator varies according to the rules set by
the negotiators.
o The arbitrator might be limited to choosing one of the
negotiatorDs last offers or to suggesting an agreement point that
is nonbinding, or free to choose and maAe any Gudgment.
o The big plus of arbitration over mediation is that it always results
in a settlement.
o Any negative depends on how 9heavy)handed: the arbitrator
appears.
A conciliator is 9a trusted third party who provides an informal
communication linA among parties.:
o This role was made famous by /obert Duval in the first
7odfather film.
o $onciliation is used e?tensively in international, labor, family, and
community disputes.
o $omparing its effectiveness to mediation has proven difficult.
o $onciliators engage in fact finding, interpreting messages,
and persuading disputants to develop agreements.
A consultant is 9a sAilled and impartial third party who attempts to
facilitate problem solving through communication and analysis, aided by
his or her Anowledge of conflict management.:
o +n contrast to the previous roles, the consultantDs role is to
improve relations between the conflicting parties so that they can
reach a settlement themselves.
o This approach has a longer)term focus: to build new and positive
perceptions and attitudes between the conflicting parties.
+nternational !6: 4Negotiating Across !ultures*6 found in the te?t and at
the end of this chapter. !btaining a favorable outcome in negotiations
may, in part, depend on the cultural characteristics of your opponent. L
OR
the 0O;0/+01T+A5 0O0/$+'0: A Negotiation Role Play found in the
te?t and at the end of this chapter. 3
OR
the $A'0 +1$+D01T 2: Negotiation Puts +oc.ey in the Penalty 0ox&
found in the te?t and at the end of this chapter. Nuestions for students to
answer follow. 3
J. '=,,A/- A1D +,;5+$AT+!1' I!/ ,A1AG0/'
A. $onflict can be either constructive or destructive
6. +nade@uate or e?cessive conflict
/educed satisfaction
+ncreased absenteeism
5ower productivity
1&)
1&* PART THREE The Group
$. !ptimal conflict
Decreases apathy
+ncreases motivation
D. .andling conflict
$ompetition
$ollaboration
Avoidance
Accommodation
$ompromise
0. 1egotiation
Distributive bargaining
Text Exercises
Myth or
Science4
High Starting Bids Lead to High Auction
Sales
This statement is false. That might surprise you, given that we Gust reviewed evidence on anchoring bias,
which would suggest that if +Dm selling something in an auction, + should set the initial bid as high as
possible. /esearch shows that this would be a mistaAe. +n fact, the opposite strategy is better.
AnalyEing auction results on e6ay, a group of researchers found that lo$er starting bids generated
higher final prices. As Gust one e?ample, 1iAon digital cameras with ridiculously low starting bids 3one
penny4 sold for an average of P12, whereas those with higher starting prices went for an average of
P27".
2
8hat e?plains such a counterintuitive result2 The researchers found that low starting bids attract
more bidders, and the increased traffic generates more competing bidders so that in the end, the price is
higher. Although this may seem irrational, negotiation and bidding behavior arenDt always rational, and as
youDve probably e?perienced firsthand, once you start bidding for something, you want to 9win,: forgetting
that for many auctions, the one with the highest bid is often the loser 3the so)called winnerDs curse4.
Cl!ss Exercise
1. $onsider using the team e?ercise at this point or referencing this material when you process the
e?ercise.
2. At that time, have students discuss what part the lacA of communication had in fostering the
conflict or how communicating minimiEed and<or resolved the conflict.
International

Negotiating Across Cultures
!btaining a favorable outcome in a negotiation may in part depend on the cultural characteristics
of your opponent. A study of negotiators in the =nited 'tates, $hina, and Kapan found that culture
plays an important role in successful negotiation. The study found that, overall, negotiators who
had both a self)serving 9egoistic: orientation and a high goal level fared the best overall compared
to negotiators with an other)serving 9prosocial: orientation and low goal level. +n other words, the
strategy combining a self)serving negotiation position, where one is focused only on ma?imiEing
oneDs own outcomes, coupled with a strong desire to obtain the best outcomes, led to the most
favorable negotiation results.
.owever, the degree to which this particular strategy resulted in better outcomes
depended on the negotiating partner. The results showed that being self)serving and having a
high negotiation goal level resulted in higher outcomes 3in this case, profits4 only when the
negotiating opponent was other)serving. 1egotiators from the =nited 'tates are more liAely to be
self)serving and have high goal levels. +n $hina and Kapan, however, there is a greater liAelihood
that negotiators are other)serving and thus are more concerned with othersD outcomes.
$onse@uently, negotiators from the =nited 'tates are liAely to obtain better outcomes for
themselves when negotiating with individuals from $hina and Kapan because American
negotiators tend to be more concerned with their own outcomes, sometimes at the e?pense of the
other party.
Though this study suggests that being self)serving can be beneficial in some situations,
negotiators should be wary of being too self)serving. Though American negotiators may benefit
from a self)serving negotiation position and a high goal level when negotiating with individuals
from $hina or Kapan, being too self)serving may result in damaged relationships, leading to less
favorable outcomes in the long run.
5ource8 6ased on -. $hen, 0. A. ,anni?, and T. !Aumura, 9The +mportance of 8ho -ou ,eet: 0ffects of
'elf)Jersus !ther)$oncerns Among 1egotiators in the =nited 'tates, The ;eopleDs /epublic of $hina, and
Kapan,: 9ournal of Experimental 5ocial Psychology, Kanuary 277, pp. 1>1#.
Class E(ercise
+nstructors may wish to engage their students in a class discussion concerning cultural differences in
negotiating.
IN THE

5!rri!e Co"nselin% &or the To* Bosses
That the two top e?ecutives of a company conflicted with one another is no surprise. 8hatDs surprising is
what they did about it.
8hen 8atermarA, a struggling maAer of AayaAs and car racAs, brought in a new e?ecutive team, the
top two e?ecutives came from very different bacAgrounds. $0! Kim $larA, ", was an avid hunter and
outdoorsman. $!! Thomas Iumarelli, #7, was an urbane professional used to high finance in 1ew -orA
and ;aris. 6ecause the organiEation was struggling, with an?ious employees who were playing them off
one another, the two e?ecutives Anew their differences were liAely to overwhelm them. 'o they headed off
personality conflicts at the pass with 2Q years of Goint e?ecutive)coaching sessions.
Although such Goint coaching sessions are highly unusual, both $larA and Iumarelli 3it was his idea4
credit the weeAly sessions for helping them worA through their differences. 9+t was liAe marriage
counseling,: said $larA. 9-ou get all the issues on the table.:
0arly on, the coaches asAed $larA and Iumarelli what they needed from another. $larA said that he
needed Iumarelli to be his eyes and ears for the company and to 9cover his bacA.: Iumarelli replied that
he needed $larA to support him. 9+ can checA my ego at the door,: he recalls saying, 96ut + need validation
and support from you for the role +Dm playing to support you.:
The two discovered a conflict, though, when the coaches asAed them separately how much time they
should spend on various corporate activities. 6oth $larA and Iumarelli thought that development of the
1&8
annual budget was his responsibility. After getting this out in the open, $larA realiEed the budget should
primarily be IumarelliDs responsibility. 9Jery early on, we Anew we were going to be stepping on each
otherDs toes,: $larA said.
8hen a private e@uity company bought 8atermarA, both left the company. 6ut even then, the two
used coaches to handle what they called their 9divorce.:
5ource8 6ased on ;. DvoraA, 9$0! and $!! Try R,arriage $ounseling,D: 1all 5treet 9ournal,
Kuly 1, 277%, p. 61, 6.
Class E(ercise
Discuss with students 3as a class or in groups4 the following:
1. 8as the approach taAen based on distributive or integrative bargaining techni@ues2
2. 8hat was the most important factor in framing the negotiations2
. ThinA of recent negotiation that you were involved with. 8as the frameworA distributive or integrative2
". Did relationships play a significant part in your negotiation2
#. 8hat could you have done to improve the outcome of the negotiation2
Point Counterpoint
Conflict Benefits #rgani+ations
Point
Con&lict Bene&its Or!ni'!tions
5etDs briefly review how stimulating conflict can provide benefits to the organiEation:
Con&lict is ! 6e!ns to sol7e *ro)le6s !nd )rin !)o"t r!dic!l ch!ne0 +tDs an effective device by
which management can drastically change the e?isting power structure, current interaction patterns,
and entrenched attitudes. +f there is no conflict, it means the real problems arenDt being addressed.
Con&lict &!cilit!tes ro"* cohesi7eness0 8hereas conflict increases hostility between groups,
e?ternal threats tend to cause a group to pull together as a unit. $onflict with another group brings
together those within each group. 'uch intragroup cohesion is a critical resource that groups draw on
in good and especially in bad times.
Con&lict i6*ro7es ro"* !nd or!ni'!tion!l e&&ecti7eness0 Groups or organiEations devoid of
conflict are liAely to suffer from apathy, stagnation, groupthinA, and other debilitating diseases. +n fact,
more organiEations probably fail because they have too little conflict, not because they have too
much. 'tagnation is the biggest threat to organiEations, but since it occurs slowly, its ill effects often
go unnoticed until itDs too late. $onflict can breaA complacencyCthough most of us donDt liAe conflict,
it often is the last best hope of saving an organiEation.
Counterpoint
+n general, conflicts are dysfunctional, and it is one of managementDs maGor responsibilities to Aeep
conflict intensity as low as humanly possible. A few points support this case:
The ne!ti7e conse8"ences &ro6 con&lict c!n )e de7!st!tin0 The list of negatives associated
with conflict is awesome. The most obvious negatives are increased turnover, decreased employee
satisfaction, inefficiencies between worA units, sabotage, and labor grievances and striAes. !ne study
estimated that managing conflict at worA costs the average employer nearly "#7 days of management
time a year.S01T
E&&ecti7e 6!n!ers )"ild te!6wor9. A good manager builds a coordinated team. $onflict worAs
against such an obGective. 8hen a team worAs well, the whole becomes greater than the sum of the
parts. ,anagement creates teamworA by minimiEing internal conflicts and facilitating internal
coordination.
Con&lict is !7oid!)le0 +t may be true that conflict is inevitable when an organiEation is in a downward
spiral, but the goal of good leadership and effective management is to avoid the spiral to begin with.
-ou donDt see 8arren 6uffett getting into a lot of conflicts with his board of directors. +tDs possible
theyDre complacent, but we thinA itDs more liAely because 6erAshire .athaway is a well)run company,
doing what it should, and avoiding conflict as a result.
Teaching Notes
10 5ead a discussion on how conflict between the student body and the administration could help or
hurt your institution.
-0 $reate functional<dysfunctional lists on the board, and asA students first how conflict could help
the college or university. /ecord these under 9functional.: +n the discussion, see if specific topics
or issues are on the studentsD minds.
:0 1e?t, asA how such conflict can harm the institution. Again, record these and solicit specific
issues, and record to whom the costs or 9hurts: would apply.
;0 1ow discuss what would maAe such conflict functional or dysfunctional.
+s it the topic2
The parties involved2
The history of the issue2
'tudent e?pectation of administration reaction to conflict2
20 Iinally, discuss:
8hy have students not spoAen up on these issues2
.ow could functional conflict be started and managed over a specific issue2
8hat are the dangers if it got out of hand2
,uestions for Re-ie.
1 . 8hat is conflict2
Answer< $onflict is a process that begins when one party perceives that another party has
negatively affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about
2. 8hat are the differences among the traditional, human relations, and interactionist views of
conflict2
Answer< The traditionalist view of conflict is the belief that all conflict is harmful and must be
avoided. The human relations view of conflict is the belief that conflict is a natural and inevitable
outcome in any group. The current view is the interactionist view of conflict or the belief that
conflict is not only a positive force in a group but also that it is absolutely necessary for a group to
perform effectively.
. 8hat are the steps of the conflict process2
1'%
1'1 PART THREE The Group
Answer< The process is diagrammed in 0?hibit 1#>1.
Stage I: Potential opposition or incompatibilityCThe first step in the conflict process
is the presence of conditions that create opportunities for conflict to arise. These
conditions have been condensed into three general categories: communication, structure,
and personal variables.
Stage II: Cognition and personalizationCThe antecedent conditions can lead to
conflict only when one or more of the parties are affected by, and aware of, the conflict.
Kust because a conflict is perceived does not mean that it is personaliEed. +t is important
because it is where conflict issues tend to be defined.
Stage III: IntentionsC+ntentions are decisions to act in a given way. 0?hibit 1#>2
represents one authorDs effort to identify the primary conflict)handling intentions. #$o
dimensionsCcooperativeness and assertiveness. Iive conflict)handling intentions can be
identified: competing 3assertive and uncooperative4, collaborating 3assertive and
cooperative4, avoiding 3unassertive and uncooperative4, accommodating 3unassertive
and cooperative4, and compromising 3midrange on both assertiveness and
cooperativeness4.
Stage IV: BehaviorCThe behavior stage includes the statements, actions, and reactions
made by the conflicting parties. These conflict behaviors are usually overt attempts to
implement each partyDs intentions. 0?hibit 1#> provides a way of visualiEing conflict
behavior. 0?hibit 1#>" lists the maGor resolution and stimulation techni@ues that allow
managers to control conflict levels.
Stage V: OutcomesC!utcomes may be functional in that the conflict results in an
improvement in the groupDs performance, or dysfunctional in that it hinders group
performance. $onflict is constructive when it improves the @uality of decisions, stimulates
creativity and innovation, etc. Dysfunctional outcomesCuncontrolled opposition breeds
discontent, which acts to dissolve common ties, and eventually leads to the destruction of
the group. Among the more undesirable conse@uences are a retarding of communication,
reductions in group cohesiveness, and subordination of group goals to the primacy of
infighting between members.
". 8hat is negotiation2
Answer< 1egotiation is a process in which two or more parties e?change goods or services and
attempt to agree on the e?change rate for them
#. 8hat are the differences between distributive and integrative bargaining2
Answer< Distributive 6argaining is negotiation that seeAs to divide up a fi?ed amount of
resourcesH a win)lose situation. +ntegrative 6argaining is negotiation that seeAs one or more
settlements that can create a win)win solution. 0?hibit 1#)# shows that these approaches to
bargaining differ in their goal and motivation, focus, interests, information sharing and duration of
relationship.
%. 8hat are the five steps in the negotiation process2
Answer< 0?hibit 1#)& shows a model of the negotiation process. +t includes the preparation and
planning, definition of ground rules, clarification and Gustification, bargaining and problem solving,
and closure and implementation.
&. .ow do the individual differences of personality and gender influence negotiations2
Answer< ;ersonality and gender can both influence negotiations. ;ersonality traits liAe
e?troverts and agreeable people are weaAer at distributive negotiation. +n contrast, disagreeable
introverts are best at this type of negotiation. +ntelligence is also a weaA indicator of bargaining.
0ffectiveness. 8ith gender, men and women negotiate the same way, but may e?perience
different outcomes. 8omen and men taAe on gender stereotypes in negotiations such as tender
and tough. +n addition, women are less liAely to negotiate.

(. 8hat are the roles and functions of third)party negotiations2
Answer< There are four basic third)party roles:
= 5edi!tor >A neutral third party who facilitates a negotiated solution by using reasoning,
persuasion, and suggestions for alternatives
/ Ar)itr!tor > A third party to a negotiation who has the authority to dictate an agreement.
/ Concili!tor > A trusted third party who provides an informal communication linA between
the negotiator and the opponent
/ Cons"lt!nt > An impartial third party, sAilled in conflict management, who attempts to
facilitate creative problem solving through communication and analysis
*. .ow does culture influence negotiations2
Answer< 1egotiating styles vary across national cultures. 'ome liAe the Kapanese negotiate
indirectly. American negotiators are more liAely than Kapanese bargainers to maAe a first offer.
1orth Americans use facts to persuade, Arabs use emotion, and /ussians used asserted ideals
6raEilians say 9no: more often than Americans or Kapanese. !ne study looAed at verbal
and nonverbal negotiation tactics e?hibited by 1orth Americans, Kapanese and 6raEilians.
Kapanese on average said 91o: five times for the nine times the 1orth Americans did, while the
6raEilians said 9no: ( times. The Kapanese displayed more than five periods of silence lasting
longer than ten seconds during the 7)minute sessions. 1orth Americans averaged .# such
periods. The Kapanese and 1orth Americans interrupted their opponent about the same number
of times and the 6raEilians interrupted 2.# to O more than their 1orth American counterparts.
Iinally, the Kapanese and the 1orth Americans had no physical contact with their opponents
during negotiations e?cept for handshaAing.
E("eriential E(ercise
A 10G!T+AT+!1 /!50 ;5A-
#his role play is designed to help you develop your negotiating s.ills* #he class is to "rea. into pairs* 'ne
person $ill play the role of Alex& the department supervisor* #he other person $ill play !* 9*& Alex3s "oss*
0oth participants should read #he 5ituation& #he Negotiation& and then their role only.
P"r*ose
This role play is designed to help students develop their negotiating sAills.
Ti6e
=p to 1 hour.
Instr"ctions
10 6reaA the class into pairs. +dentify one person as Ale? and one person as $.K.
!ne person will play the role of Ale?, the department supervisor.
The other person will play $.K., Ale?Ds boss.
1'$
1'& PART THREE The Group
+t is easier to manage if all the student pairs sit facing the same way, so you can
designate one side as $.K. and one side as Ale?. +t will help you Aeep studentsD roles
straight during the discussion.
-0 .ave students read only their portion of the role play.
:0 'tudents should taAe 1# minutes to thinA through the facts in this e?ercise and to prepare a
strategy.
;0 They then have up to 1# minutes to conduct negotiation.
20 8hen negotiation is complete, the class will compare the various strategies used and pair
outcomes.
The Sit"!tion
Ale? and $.K. worA for 1iAe in ;ortland, !regon. Ale? supervises a research laboratory. $.K. is the
manager of research and development. Ale? and $.K. are former college runners who have worAed for
1iAe for more than si? years. $.K. has been Ale?Ds boss for 2 years. !ne of Ale?Ds employees has greatly
impressed Ale?. This employee is 5isa /oland. 5isa was hired 11 months ago. 'he is 2" years old and
holds a masterDs degree in mechanical engineering. .er entry)level salary was P"&,#77 a year. 'he was
told by Ale? that, in accordance with corporation policy, she would receive an initial performance
evaluation at % months and a comprehensive review after 1 year. 6ased on her performance record, 5isa
was told she could e?pect a salary adGustment at the time of the 1)year evaluation.
Ale?Ds evaluation of 5isa after % months was very positive. Ale? commented on the long hours
5isa was putting in, her cooperative spirit, the fact that others in the lab enGoyed worAing with her, and that
she was maAing an immediate positive impact on the proGect she had been assigned. 1ow that 5isaDs first
anniversary is coming up, Ale? has again reviewed 5isaDs performance. Ale? thinAs 5isa may be the best
new person the /MD group has ever hired. After only a year, Ale? has ranAed 5isa as the number)three
performer in a department of 11.
'alaries in the department vary greatly. Ale?, for instance, has a basic salary of P&%,777, plus
eligibility for a bonus that might add another P&,777 to P12,777 a year. The salary range of the 11
department members is P(,"77 to P%%,#7. The lowest salary is a recent hire with a bachelorDs degree in
physics. The two people that Ale? has rated above 5isa earn base salaries of P#*,277 and P%%,#7.
TheyDre both 2& years old and have been at 1iAe for three and four years, respectively. The median salary
in Ale?Ds department is P#",*%7.
Alex(s Role
-ou want to give 5isa a big raise. 8hile sheDs young, she has proven to be an e?cellent addition to the
department. -ou donDt want to lose her. ,ore importantly, she Anows in general what other people in the
department are earning and she thinAs she is underpaid. The company typically gives 1)year raises of #
percent, although 17 percent is not unusual, and 27 to 7 percent increases have been approved on
occasion. -ouRd liAe to get 5isa as large an increase as $. K. will approve.
C0J0(s Role
All your supervisors typically try to s@ueeEe you for as much money as they can for their people. -ou
understand this because you did the same thing when you were a supervisor, but your boss wants to
Aeep a lid on costs. .e wants you to Aeep raises for recent hires generally in the #)to)( percent range. +n
fact, he has sent a memo to all managers and supervisors saying this. .e also said that managers will be
evaluated on their ability to maintain budgetary control. .owever, your boss is also concerned with e@uity
and paying people what theyDre worth. -ou feel assured that he will support any salary recommendation
you maAe, as long as it can be Gustified. -our goal, consistent with cost reduction, is to Aeep salary
increases as low as possible.
The Neoti!tion
Ale? has a meeting scheduled with $.K. to discuss 5isaDs performance review and salary adGustment. TaAe
a couple of minutes to thinA through the facts in this e?ercise and to prepare a strategy. Then you have up
to 1# minutes to conduct your negotiation. 8hen your negotiation is complete, the class will compare the
various strategies used and pair outcomes.
Teaching Notes:
10 The process for running the e?ercise is self)e?planatory.
-0 $onsider assigning some pairs a distributive strategy and some an integrative strategy. This will
permit a comparison of results for discussion.
:0 $onsider your gender mi? in the pairs, if you want to include a discussion of male<female
negotiating strategies.
;0 Ior the saAe of time, this e?ercise can also be conducted as a 9fish bowl: using only one pair of
students and having the rest of the class observe.
Et!ical 0ile11a
+' +T =10T.+$A5 T! 5+0, D0$0+J0, !/ $!55=D0 D=/+1G 10G!T+AT+!1'2
+n $hapter 11, we addressed lying in the conte?t of communication. .ere we return to the topic of lying
but specifically as it relates to negotiation. 8e thinA this issue is important because, for many people,
there is no such thing as lying when it comes to negotiating.
+tDs been said that the whole notion of negotiation is built on ethical @uicAsand: To succeed, you must
deceive. +s this true2 Apparently, a lot of people thinA so. Ior instance, one study found that 2( percent of
negotiators lied about at least one issue during negotiations, while another study found that 177 percent
of negotiators either failed to reveal a problem or actively lied about it during negotiations if they were not
directly asAed about the issue. 8hy do you thinA these numbers are so high2 The research on negotiation
provides numerous e?amples of lying giving the negotiator a strategic advantage.
"
8e can probably agree that bald)faced lies during negotiation are wrong. At least most ethicists would
probably agree. The universal dilemma surrounds the little lies: The omissions, evasions, and
concealments that are often necessary to best an opponent.
During negotiations, when is a lie a lie2 +s e?aggerating benefits, downplaying negatives, ignoring
flaws, or saying 9+ donDt Anow: when in reality you do considered lying2 +s declaring 9this is my final offer
and nonnegotiable: 3even when youDre posturing4 a lie2 +s pretending to bend over bacAward to maAe
meaningful concessions lying2 /ather than being considered unethical, the use of these 9lies: is
considered by many as an indicator that a negotiator is strong, smart, and savvy.
!r consider the issue of colluding, as when two bidders agree not to bid against one another in a
3concealed4 effort to Aeep the bids down. +n some cases, such collusion is illegal, but even when it isnDt
illegal, is it ethical2
1. 8hen are deception, evasiveness, or collusion out of bounds2
Answer< when they cross the legal boundaries. The goal is to win)win at the end and
retain an ongoing relationship in most instances.
2. $an such tactics be legal and still be unethical
Answer< -es, there are many situations where things are unethical but not illegal. The
law cannot cover every instance, nor should it attempt to.
. +s it naive to be completely honest and bare your soul during negotiations2
Answer< -es, barely your soul or being naUve will probably not have a good result. -ou
can be a good negotiator without being unethical or deceptive. Timing is important.
". Are the rules of negotiations uni@ue2 +s any tactic that will improve your chance of winning
acceptable2
Answer: -es, negotiation is a sAill that needs to be learned and honed. The rules are
somewhat uni@ue but you need to negotiate with integrity. 1o, many tactics are not
acceptable. The ground rules should be set upfront.
1''
5ource8 6ased on /. $ohen, 96ad 6idness,: Ne$ :or. #imes )aga%ine, 'eptember 2, 277%, p. 22H
,. 0. 'chweitEer, 9Deception in 1egotiations,: in '. K. .och and .. $. Vunreuther 3eds.4, 1harton on
)a.ing Decisions 31ew -orA: 8iley, 27714, pp. 1(&>277H and ,. Diener, 9Iair 0nough,: Entrepreneur,
Kanuary 2772, pp. 177>172.
Class E(ercise
5ead a discussion, or breaA the students into groups to discuss the @uestions raised in the last paragraph
of the dilemma. AsA them to apply these @uestions to various situations. Do they come up with different
outcomes depending on the scenario2 8hy or why not2
S"ested ?isc"ssion<
The issues raised in the 0thical Dilemma, focus on negotiations and deceptive practices. To enhance the
discussion, the instructor may wish to provide students with two models of negotiationsCdistributive and
integrative. The former model assumes limited resources in fi?ed amounts and falls into the category of
Eero)sum activities 3in order for one party to gain, the other must lose4H the integrative approach is
thoroughly discussed in the booA 7etting #o :es. .ere the assumption is that negotiations are principled
affairs that are based on establishing goals, not engaging in deceptive practices. !ther areas for
discussion should focus on relationships between the parties 3and whether or not those relationships are
on)going4. !ne topic to e?plore could be using deceptive practices in negotiating with individuals with
whom you have an on)going relationship. AsA students what may happen to issues of trust and
cooperation2
S"ested Scen!rios<
10 1egotiate your salary and benefits pacAage for a Gob you have Gust been offered with a new
employer. The employer would liAe to Anow what you were compensated in your last Gob.
-0 1egotiate with a vendor who will do e?tensive renovations of the company head@uarters over the
ne?t year. -ou are on a very tight budget and if you come in under budget, you will be a 9hero:
and receive a promotion and bonus.
:0 1egotiate a divorce. -our retirement and the savings for your childrenDs education are at staAe.
-ou suspect your to)be e?)spouse will fritter it away.
;0 1egotiate the sale of your house. -ou are in deep debt and need to ma?imiEe the selling price to
come out 9unscathed.: -ou are moving into a very small apartment to save money once the sale
is complete.
Case Incident 1
DAJ+D !=T)10G!T+AT+1G G!5+AT.: A;!T0O A1D 6/+'T!5),-0/' 'N=+66
;eter Dolan survived many crises in his five)year tenure as $0! of drug giant 6ristol),yers '@uibb.
There were a corporate accounting scandal, allegations of insider trading, I6+ raids of his office, and a
stocA price that dropped %7 percent during his tenure. 6ut in the end, what may have done Dolan in was
his negotiation performance against the head of Apote?, a $anadian drug company founded by Dr. 6arry
'herman.
At its peaA, ;lavi?Ca drug to prevent heart attacAsCwas 6ristol),yersDs best)selling drug and
accounted for a staggering one)third of its profits. 'o when Apote? developed a generic ;lavi? AnocAoff,
Dolan sought to negotiate an agreement that would pay Apote? in e?change for a delayed launch of
Apote?Ds generic competitor. Dolan sent one of his closest lieutenants, Andrew 6odnar, to negotiate with
'herman. 6odnar and 'herman developed a good rapport, and at several points in their negotiations
asAed their attorneys to leave them alone. At one Aey point in the negotiations, 6odnar flew to Toronto
alone, without 6ristol),yersDs attorneys, as a 9gesture of goodwill. The thinAing was that the negotiations
would be more effective this way.:
As Dolan, 6odnar, and 6ristol),yers became increasingly concerned with reaching an agreement
with 'herman and Apote?, they developed a blind spot. ;rivately, 'herman was betting that the Iederal
Trade $ommission 3IT$4 wouldnDt approve the noncompete agreement the two parties were negotiating,
and his goal in the negotiation was to e?tract an agreement from 6ristol),yers that would position Apote?
favorably should the IT$ reGect the deal. +ndeed, he nonchalantly inserted a clause in the deal that would
re@uire 6ristol),yers to pay Apote? P%7 million if the IT$ reGected the deal. 9+ thought the IT$ would turn
it down, but + didnDt let on that + did,: 'herman said. 9They seemed blind to it.:
+n the meantime, Apote? covertly began shipping its generic e@uivalent, and it @uicAly became the
best)selling generic drug ever. Thus, 'herman also managed to launch the generic e@uivalent without
6ristol),yersDs even considering the possibility that he would do so while still engaged in negotiations.
9+t looAs liAe a much smaller generic private company completely outmaneuvered two of the giants of
the pharmaceutical industry,: said Gbola Amusa, 0uropean pharmaceutical analyst for 'anford $.
6ernstein M $ompany. 9+tDs not clear how or why that happened. The reaction from investors and analysts
has ranged from shocA to outright anger.: 8ithin a few months, Dolan was out at 6ristol),yers.
@"estions
10 8hat principles of distributive negotiation did 'herman use to gain his advantage2
Answer< .is goal was to get as much of the pie as possible. .e was not looAing for a long)term
relationship and as such, he was in a win<lose mode. Their interests were opposed and he did not
share information.
-0 Do you thinA 'herman behaved ethically2 8hy or why not2
Answer< 1o, he did not bargain in good faith and he was deceptive in his tactics. .e hedged his bets
and planned to win regardless of the IT$ ruling.
:0 8hat does this incident tell you about the role of deception in negotiation2
Answer< Deception can be used, however, unethical it is not illegal. +n this case, he and his company
prospered due to his deceptive techni@ues.
5ource8 6ased on K. $arreyrou and K. '. 5ublin, 9.ow 6ristol),yers Iumbled Defense of P" 6illion Drug,:
1all 5treet 9ournal, 'eptember 2, 277%, pp. A1, A&H and '. 'aul, 9,arAeters of ;lavi? !utfo?ed on a
Deal,: Ne$ :or. #imes, August *, 277%
Case Incident $
10G!T+AT+!1 ;=T' .!$V0- +1 T.0 ;01A5T- 6!O
1ot every negotiation ends on a good note. Kust asA 1ational .ocAey 5eague 31...5.4 $ommissioner
Gary 6ettman, who, on Iebruary 1%, 277#, cancelled all of the games remaining in the season following a
#)month locAout by the owners. Though professional sports such as hocAey and baseball have had close
calls with losing an entire season, 6ettmanDs decision was a first: The whole schedule was lost. 'aid
6ettman, 9This is a sad, regrettable day.:
!n the other side of the dispute, 6ob Goodenow, e?ecutive director of the 1...5. ;layerDs
Association, similarly regretted the impasse. .e said, 9-es, we apologiEe to the fans.: Though the
repercussions to the league and its players are obvious, canceling the season also had ramifications on a
broader level, including lost revenues for local businesses and 1...5. game merchandise sales.
'o, why did 6ettman cancel the season2 The primary issue was a salary cap, but Goodenow
said, 9The players never asAed for more money. They didnDt want to be locAed out. Gary owes the
apology. .e started the locAout. 8eDve done an awful lot to try to get to a fair resolution.: According to
1')
1'* PART THREE The Group
reports, negotiations began when the league attempted to lower the average salary from P1.( million per
year to P1. million per yearCa 2( percent decrease. The leagueDs reason2 Although the 1...5.Ds total
revenue had reached P2.1 billion a year, players were paid &# percent of this revenue. According to the
league, this high percentage Aept the league from being profitable and directly contributed to the leagueDs
loss of P"&* million over the past two seasons. The playerDs union then countered with an offer to reduce
salaries by 2" percent rather than the 2( percent the league wanted. 6ettman then tried an alternative
solution: to persuade the union to accept a salary percentage of no more than ## percent of league
revenues. +nstead of reducing pay to an average level, this proposal would linA playersD pay to the
leaguesD revenues, which could fluctuate up or down. The leagueDs players opposed both ideas until
6ettman and the 1...5. team owners offered a salary cap that did not linA payroll and revenue. At this
point, negotiations looAed promising.
.owever, neither party could agree on an amount. The owners offered a cap of P"7 million per
team and then increased it to P"2.# million. 6ut the players wanted a cap of P#2 million per team and then
lowered their proposal to P"* million. Although the dollar difference in this round of negotiations amounted
to only %.# million, neither side could agree, negotiations stopped, and the season was cancelled.
'aid Goodenow, 9Gary gave us a final offer, a taAe)it)or)leave)it offer. 8e made a
counterproposal and events ground to a halt.: A reporter asAed both sides whether they would have
accepted a compromise of around P"# million per team. 'uch a compromise may have saved the season.
6ettman stated, 9+f they wanted P"# million, +Dm not saying we would have gone there, but they sure
should have told us.: Goodenow, however, wouldnDt speculate: 9The what)ifs arenDt for real.:
'o how did the two sides eventually get the players bacA on the ice2 They agreed to a %)year
deal that set a salary cap of P* million per team for the 277#>277% season 3remember the players
wanted a cap of P"* million4. ,any players were unhappy with the terms of the deal but felt that fighting
the salary cap was a waste of time that did nothing but alienate the fans. ,any players spoAe out against
Goodenow, arguing that he put the players in a no)win situation. 5ess than a weeA after the locAout
ended, Goodenow resigned as e?ecutive director of the 1...5. ;layerDs Association. .e denied that his
resignation was in response to the playersD complaints. The lacA of an agreement in the 1...5.
negotiations was a loss to everyoneCthe league and businesses connected to the league, the owners,
the players, and, of course, the fans.
@"estions
10 .ow would you characteriEe the 1...5. negotiationCas distributive or integrative2 Irom what
perspective 3distributive or integrative4 did the parties approach the negotiation2 .ow might this
approach have affected the outcome2
Answer< +t is clearly distributive, adversarial where both parties viewed the situation as a Eero)
sum activity. 1either party was willing to move from their 9final positions.: 1or did either party
9trust: the other.
-0 8hat factors do you believe led to the lacA of a settlement in the 1... 5. negotiations2 .ow might
you have handled the negotiation if you were a representative of the league2 !f the playerDs
union2
Answer< This @uestion calls for students to speculate as to what they may have done if they were
in the situation. This would be an interesting class e?ercise by having some students taAe the role
of management and other the players association.
:0 1egotiating parties are often reluctant to reveal their 6AT1A 3best alternative to a negotiated
agreement4 to the opposing party. Do you believe that parties in the 1...5. negotiation were
aware of each otherDs 6AT1A2 .ow might this Anowledge have affected the negotiation2
Answer< +t was clear that neither party understood 3or particularly cared4 what the otherDs
alternatives 3or walA away positions4 were. Given the lacA of maturity of the parties and their
mutual distrust, there was very little room for effective and integrative bargaining.
;0 +t appears that a point of compromise 3a P"# million per team salary cap, for e?ample4 may have
e?isted. 8hat steps could both parties have taAen to reach this point of compromise2
Answer< 6oth parties would have had to demonstrate 9good faith: in their dealings with the other.
Given the hostility and the volatile climate, this was virtually impossible in the environment where
the negotiations 3or lacA thereof4 tooA place.
5ource8 6ased on K. 5apointe, and /. 8esthead, 95eague $ancels .ocAey 'eason in 5abor 6attle,: #he Ne$ :or.
#imes, Iebruary 1&, 277#, p. A.1.
Instructor2s C!oice
Neoti!tin with the N!tion!l L!)or Rel!tions Bo!rd
;ower struggles often end up as negotiation and bargaining scenarios. !ne place to trace historic
negotiations between management and labor is the 1ational 5abor /elations 6oard 8eb site 3see
www.nlrb.gov4. Go to the 8eb site and linA to $ase 'ummaries found under the 1ews /oom menu.
$hoose a famous case, summariEe the conflict, describe the negotiation issues, and summariEe the
eventual outcome of the case. !nce you have done this, indicate the form of conflict present and how the
negotiation process helped to resolve the conflict.
Instr"ctor ?isc"ssion
The 15/6 8eb site has several famous cases documented and filed. +t is interesting that the 15/6 often
changes its political stance on issues as members often change as new governmental administrations are
brought into power. Ior this reason, the viewer can see that some issues are re)visited. +t is useful to
present a contemporary case to illustrate the negotiation process. 'ince the 8eb site is updated
fre@uently, the instructor can choose a case that has Gust been heard or one that is more classical in
nature. 6ased on the way the case is presented on the 8eb site, the instructor could present the case
without revealing the ruling and have the students try to determine what the eventual ruling 3and Gustifying
reasons4 was.
1'8
EXP3#RIN4 #B T#PIC #N THE
W#R30 WI0E WEB
'earch 0ngines are our navigational tools to e?plore the 888. 'ome commonly used search engines
are:
www.goto.com www.google.com www.e?cite.com
www.lycos.com www.hotbot.com www.looAsmart.com
1. 5etDs start out with a laugh. Go to dispair.com and see what their commentary is for dysfunction.
;oint to: http:<<www.despair.com<demotivators<dysfunction.html. 8hile you are there feel free to
looA at some of the other posters that 9spoof: traditional motivational posters found on the walls of
businesses and schools. 0nGoyF
2. .ow do you handle conflict when it arises2 'even guidelines for handling conflict can be found at:
http:<<www.mediate.com<articles<Gordan2.cfm. ThinA of a conflict you are involved in or have been
involved in recently. .ow could you have applied these guidelines to that situation2 +s there room
for improvement in your conflict management sAills2 8rite a short reflection paper 3or a
paragraph or two4 on one of the guidelines and how you plan to use it in future conflicts.
. +f you have never been involved in labor negotiations it can be a challenging tasACespecially if
you lacA e?perience in the process. ;reparation is Aey. 0very manager should have an
understanding of the process. 5earn more at: http:<<www.mediate.com<articles<lynnV.cfm. Are
there lessons in this article that could be applied to any negotiation processCfor e?ample, buying
a car, negotiating a contract with a vendor, etc.2 ThinA of a circumstance where you might find
yourself e?plaining a negotiation process to a friend and the sAills necessary to be successful.
3=se the article for ideas.4 8rite out the scenario and sAills and bring it to class.
". 1egotiating with other cultures re@uires an understanding of the culture and the individuals with
whom you are negotiating. ;oint to: http:<<www.mediate.com<articles<lauchli.cfm to learn more
about negotiation and dispute resolution with the $hinese. As the booA has discussed, the
$hinese are a collectivist culture different in many ways from Americans. 8rite two or three things
of interest you learned from reading this article and bring it to class.
#. /ead the article by 'tella Ting)Toomey titled 9+ntercultural $onflict ,anagement: A ,indful
Approach: at: http:<<www.personal.anderson.ucla.edu<richard.goodman<c"web<,indful.htm. 8rite
a short synopsis of the three maGor points of the paper. 8hat is the most interesting or intriguing
idea put forth in the paper2 Do you agree or disagree with her assessments2 6ring your written
worA to class for further discussion.
%. The =niversity of $olorado offers a great deal of information regarding conflict management on
their website. !ne page provides abstracts of selected readings on transformative conflict
resolution. 'ome readings are more global in natureCothers are geared to the organiEation.
;oint to: http:<<www.colorado.edu<conflict<transform<abslist.htm and select three abstracts of
interest to you. ;rint them off and bring them to class. ;repare a short presentation on what you
learned from articles. 6e prepared to talA about them before the class or in small groups.
15%
1
01D1!T0'
V. 8. Thomas, 9Toward ,ultidimensional Jalues in Teaching: The 0?ample of $onflict 6ehaviors,: Academy of
)anagement Revie$, Kuly 1*&&, p. "(&.
2
G. Vu, A. D. GalinsAy, and K. V. ,urnighan, 9'tarting 5ow but 0nding .igh: A /eversal of the Anchoring 0ffect
in Auctions,: 9ournal of Personality and 5ocial Psychology *7 3Kune 277%4, pp. *&#>*(%.
N. /eade, 98orAplace $onflict +s Time)consuming ;roblem for 6usiness,: Personnel#oday*com, 'eptember 7,

277", S=/5Twww.personneltoday.co.uAS<=/5T.
"
V. !D$onnor and ;. $arnevale, 9A 1asty but 0ffective 1egotiation 'trategy: ,isrepresentation of a $ommon)
Jalue +ssue,: Personality and 5ocial Psychology 0ulletin, ,ay 1**&, pp. #7">#1#.

Conflict and Negotiation in Groups

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Conflict and Negotiation in Groups

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

118 PART THREE The Group

N. /eade, 98orAplace $onflict +s Time)consuming ;roblem for 6usiness,: Personnel#oday*com, 'eptember 7,

Você também pode gostar