What is Communicated During a Negotiation?
Communicating Offers, Counteroffers, and Motives
- Marketing, Advertising, Sales & PR
- Accounting, Taxation, and Reporting
- Professionalism & Career Development
Law, Transactions, & Risk Management
Government, Legal System, Administrative Law, & Constitutional Law Legal Disputes - Civil & Criminal Law Agency Law HR, Employment, Labor, & Discrimination Business Entities, Corporate Governance & Ownership Business Transactions, Antitrust, & Securities Law Real Estate, Personal, & Intellectual Property Commercial Law: Contract, Payments, Security Interests, & Bankruptcy Consumer Protection Insurance & Risk Management Immigration Law Environmental Protection Law Inheritance, Estates, and Trusts
- Business Management & Operations
- Economics, Finance, & Analytics
Table of ContentsWhat is Communicated in a Negotiation?Communicating Information about Alternatives Communicating Information about OutcomesCommunicating ExplanationsCommunicating Procedural Matters
What is Communicated in a Negotiation?
A negotiator communicates her preferences during a negotiation. Selectively relaying preferences can have a powerful influence on the actions of the other party and on outcomes.
A communicative framework for negotiation assumes that the communication of offers is a dynamic process; the process is interactive; and that various internal and external factors drive the interaction and motivate a bargainer to change his or her offer.
- Communicating Offers
- Counteroffers, and
Communicating Information about Alternatives
The existence of a BATNA changes several things in a negotiation:
1) Compared to negotiators without attractive BATNAs, negotiators with attractive BATNAs set higher reservation prices for themselves than their counterparts;
2) Negotiators whose counterparts had attractive BATNAs set lower reservation points for themselves; and
3) When both parties were aware of the attractive BATNA that one of the negotiators had, that negotiator received a more positive negotiation outcome.
Communicating Information about Outcomes
Negotiators should be cautious about sharing their outcomes or even their positive reactions to outcomes with the other party. This is especially true if they are going to negotiate with that party again in the future.
Social Accounts is the method used by negotiators to explain things to the other party, especially when negotiators need to justify bad news. Sitkin and Bies (1993) suggest that three types of explanations are important:
- Explanations of mitigating circumstances - Where negotiators suggest that they had no choice in taking the positions they did;
- Explanations of exonerating circumstances - Where negotiators explain their positions from a broader perspective, suggesting that while their current position may appear negative, it derives from positive motives; and
- Reframing explanations - Where outcomes can be explained by changing the context.
Communicating Procedural Matters
Communications regarding what needs to take place and how. It can involve how well the process is going or what procedures might be adopted to improve the situation. Recall that a primary interest of a negotiator may be procedure-based as much as outcome or relationship-based.
Back to: Negotiations & Communications