Page 82 - DMGT519_Conflict Management and Negotiation Skills

Conflict Management and Negotiation Skills

Notes 3. Review Teams: To monitor the progress of the implementation plan, the individuals/
parties should also agree on setting up joint implementation review teams. These
individual/parties should ensure adequate information sharing, provide timely feedback,
make mid-course correction, and by and large make sure that progress is timely and as
planned.

4.12 Distributive Negotiation

Distributive negotiation takes place when the resources are fixed and limited (fixed-pie situation)
and each individual/party wants to get a large share for itself. Therefore, distributive negotiation
becomes essentially a competition to get the maximum for one’s self. The competitive negotiator
views the negotiating world as one controlled by an ego-centric self-interest. Resources are
limited and the distribution of these resources should be distributive in nature (Sherman and
Asherman, 2001). Distributive negotiations are lengthy and typically involve deceptive
arguments and new concessions. Negotiators mark their true intents and needs by exaggerating
emotions and demands and by exhibiting conflicting verbal and non-verbal cues. In this kind of
negotiation though the goals and objectives of individuals/parties are diametrically opposed,
the relationship is still interdependent. However, the focus is on pushing one’s entry point
closer to the exit point. Hence the concern is with the subjective utility of the outcome, and the
cost of delay in reaching a settlement or terminating the process of negotiation is very high.
Distributive bargaining generally takes place in case of a one time-relationship. Some of the
tactics used in distributive bargaining are described below:
1. Bluffing: It refers to the making of a false statement of position, a promise, or threat which
the individual/party has no intention to carry out. The negotiators use “linguistic
behaviour” such as disclaimer, hedging, omissions, and vague language to project an
image of strength (Lewicki and Litterer, 1985).
2. Delays: For reaching favourable settlements, discussions are often deliberately prolonged
to put time pressure on the other individual/party. This becomes particularly effective if
there is a time limit within which the other individual/party has to make the deal.
3. Snow Job: It refers to putting pressure on the other individual/party by presenting a long
list of issues to be discussed, most of which may not have any significance for the individual/
party presenting them. This is more true in union-management negotiations where the
union charter of demands runs into several pages. The idea is to “blind” the other
individual/party as it happens when it snows.
4. Temper Tantrums: These are often used to show one’s anger, frustration, or dissatisfaction
either with the progress of negotiation or on the nature of the counter proposals. This is
just a show to make the other individual/party uncomfortable and agree on a proposal
favourable to angry individual/party.
5. Nibble: This basically refers to wearing down the adversary to reach an agreement on an
issue after hard and prolonged bargaining. When the adversary is about to agree, he/she
is asked for some small favour before the final agreement is signed.
6. Limited Authority: It is used to push a particular proposal and emphasising that this
proposal is within the authority of the bargainer. For anything more than that the bargainer
has to check with higher ups which would delay and/or change the outcome. It is usually
practised if the individual/party is representing a client or a constituent.
Fundamental Strategies

The prime objective in distributive bargaining is to maximise the value of the current deal. In
the condo example, the buyer has four fundamental strategies available:

76 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY