The Intelligent Negotiator (4 page)

Whenever you bargain, always keep the relationship in view. The other side is
not
the enemy. The person may in fact be someone you respect, admire, or care deeply about. He or she simply has something you want to obtain, or wants something you possess. If you can effectively enhance your bargaining encounters through more courteous behavior, you will enjoy the process more and increase the probability of successful interactions.

As Felicia Brown (whom you met in the introduction) begins her search for a new position, she wants to be an Innovator. She hopes to gain new employment with favorable terms, but recognizes the need to provide her new employer with a fair return on its investment. If she behaves too competitively when she negotiates her initial employment terms, she may either lose the offer or begin her new relationship on a sour note. On the other hand, if she fails to appreciate the fact that business firms expect her to bargain over her new conditions of employment and is hesitant to ask for more beneficial terms, she will short-change herself and jeopardize her future job satisfaction with that company.

A N
OTE ABOUT
E
THNIC AND
G
ENDER
D
IFFERENCES

When we negotiate with others, we initially feel most comfortable with people who are similar to us in terms of age, ethnicity, gender, religion, and socio-economic status. Similarity induces trust and reduces the need for the participants to maintain a particular “face” in each other’s eyes. When we interact with individuals who are different from us in these regards, we often distract ourselves by trying to verify the positive and negative images we may have of people similar to those with whom we are conversing. Such stereotypical assumptions can wreak havoc with encounters. By being aware of the human tendency to stereotype, you can lessen its impact on your negotiations.

Ethnicity

When African-Americans, Asian-Americans, European-Americans, and Latino-Americans interact, they are preliminarily influenced by stereotypical beliefs that members of each group have regarding members of other groups and of their own group. Many of my law students—regardless of their ethnicity—think that European-Americans (particularly males) are the most Machiavellian and competitive negotiators. They expect them to use the manipulative adversarial style, looking only to generate optimal results for themselves. On the other hand, students expect African-American, Asian-American, and Latino-American negotiators to use a more cooperative style, assuming them to be desirous of win-win results. When counterparts fail to conform
to these stereotyped perceptions, the bargaining process often gets derailed.

Establish trusting and cooperative relationships with counterparts of different ethnic backgrounds before you engage in serious substantive discussions. Never assume that members of particular ethnic groups will be more or less competent, more or less cooperative or competitive, or more or less pleasant to deal with. Each individual must be evaluated to determine his or her unique personal strengths and weaknesses. If you do not assess your counterpart realistically, your stereotypical beliefs will interfere with your ability to fully interact with that person.

Always acknowledge that the particular personal traits of the individual negotiators determine how each encounter develops. Evaluate and deal with each counterpart differently. Is that person a cooperative, adversarial, or innovative bargainer? Does he or she hold greater, equal, or less bargaining power than you hold concerning the issues on the table? What negotiating techniques do you think can be optimally employed against this negotiator? Try to keep an open mind, and be prepared to respond affirmatively to unanticipated disclosures or changed circumstances.

If you begin a bargaining interaction with the notion that particular counterparts will be less proficient because of their ethnicity or gender, you give your counterparts an inherent advantage. For you have let your guard down and presented them with the opportunity to exploit the situation. If you are the target of such stereotyping by counterparts, take advantage of the situation, and claim everything you can for yourself.

I am occasionally asked whether minority students perform as well on my negotiation exercises as non-minority students. In a recent article, James Sammataro
noted the reluctance of African-American athletes to hire African-American agents, apparently believing that European-American agents would obtain better results from white owners.
³
This article induced me to review my own course data to see whether this supposition was correct. I found absolutely no difference between the results achieved by African-American and European-American students in my course.
⁴
Assuming differences based on the ethnicity of your counterparts can prevent you from successfully negotiating with them.

Gender

Gender-based stereotypes often cause negotiators difficulty when they interact with people of the opposite sex. Men see overt aggressiveness that they consider appropriate when employed by men as inappropriate when used by women. Some female negotiators try to obtain a psychological advantage against male counterparts by, for instance, resorting to foul language and loud voices. Male bargainers who would directly counter these tactics when used by other men find it difficult to respond in kind against “ladies.” When male negotiators limit their use of bargaining tactics this way, they provide female bargainers with a great advantage. Conversely, some male negotiators try to obtain a psychological advantage against aggressive female counterparts by questioning their femininity. They hope to embarrass their counterparts and make them feel self-conscious.

Never allow male or female counterparts to undermine your negotiating approach. Any negotiator has the right to use techniques you consider appropriate—regardless of the gender-based stereotypes they may contradict.

If you are a woman and find that the gender-based beliefs of your coworkers are negatively influencing your bargaining interactions, you can raise the subject directly. Politely ask your colleagues if they find it difficult to negotiate with women. They will undoubtedly deny any such problems, but will privately reevaluate their own behavior.

Empirical studies have shown that men and women do not behave identically in competitive situations.
⁵
Women tend to be initially more trusting and more trustworthy than men, but less willing to forgive violations of their trust. If you are a male negotiator interacting with female counterparts, establish a trusting environment that facilitates the discussions—and be careful not to engage in disingenuous behavior that may destroy the trust that develops. If you are a female negotiator interacting with male counterparts, do not automatically assume you are facing an Adversary; and conversely, male negotiators should not assume female counterparts are Cooperators.

Other gender-based stereotypes may influence male and female bargaining interactions. Men are expected to be task-oriented, while women are supposed to be more concerned with maintaining good relationships. Men are expected to be aggressive and openly competitive, while women are expected to be passive and submissive. When men and women interact, men tend to speak for longer periods of time, and they tend to interrupt more often. In negotiating settings, men tend to use more forceful language, whereas women use more modifiers, such as “don’t you think …” and “it seems to me …,” which undermine their persuasiveness. On the other hand, women are generally better listeners than men, and better readers of nonverbal signals.

When women enter the marketplace, others may work harder to take advantage of them than they would
with respect to males. A classic study was conducted by Professor Ian Ayres of car prices offered to men and women by car dealers under identical circumstances.
⁶
Ayres found that salespeople offer male buyers better deals than female buyers—a difference of several hundred dollars. It is not clear whether sales personnel simply think that women buyers are less capable negotiators or whether they are afraid of being embarrassed by giving overly generous terms to women. This market bias has convinced a number of my former female students to take male friends with them when they purchase new cars. They know it gives them more leverage in this particular bargaining situation.

Do gender-based differences affect results achieved by men and women on identical negotiation exercises? In a recent study, I found support for the theory that women feel less comfortable with overt competition—more women (38.8%) take my Legal Negotiating course on a pass/fail basis than men (26.7%).
⁷
On the other hand, I found no statistically significant differences in the results achieved by men and women on my negotiation exercises.

If you are a man (or a woman) who stereotypes women as less-proficient bargainers, you provide your female counterparts with a great advantage. Nothing is better than opponents who underestimate your bargaining capabilities. If you are a woman who is taken lightly by male counterparts, do not hesitate to recalibrate your bargaining strategy accordingly. Subtly induce them to give you the information you need to obtain optimal results for yourself.

S
UMMARY
P
OINTS

Don’t always use a single negotiating strategy.

• The Competitive-Adversarial negotiating style may be most appropriate for impersonal, one-time negotiations. Competitive-Adversarials open bargaining with low offers and high demands, focus principally on their own stated positions rather than reason out solutions, make minimal concessions, and seek to maximize their own returns.
  

• The Cooperative-Problem-Solver negotiating style is most appropriate for negotiations within ongoing relationships. Cooperative Problem Solvers begin with realistic opening positions, maximize the disclosure of information, rely on objective criteria to guide the discussions, and seek to maximize
  joint
  party returns.
  

• The Competitive-Problem-Solver negotiating style, which is characterized by flexibility, is the most effective strategy for dealing with all types. Competitive Problem Solvers begin with strategic opening positions that are principled and designed to set the tone for the discussions, match their counterpart’s style of information disclosure, avoid unreciprocated concessions, rely on objective criteria to guide the discussions, and seek to obtain optimal results for themselves while maximizing the joint returns achieved by both sides.
  

• Assess every bargaining counterpart on his or her own merits; stereotyping counterparts because of gender or ethnicity will hamper the negotiation as well as provide the stereotyped bargainer with a considerable advantage.
  

C
HAPTER
2
P
REPARING TO
N
EGOTIATE

M
ost of us have heard the story of the New York City resident stopped on the street by a visitor who asks, “How do I get to Carnegie Hall?” The New Yorker replies, “Practice, practice, practice!” This adage is as true for negotiators hoping to achieve beneficial bargaining results as for anyone who hopes to perform at Carnegie Hall. Bargaining is a performance, and a highly interactive one at that. The Intelligent Negotiator knows this and prepares thoroughly.

In the bargaining context, knowledge constitutes power. You will attain better results if you come to the bargaining table with as much information as possible. If you appreciate the real value of the items being exchanged, and have a good idea what other options are available to you if you do not reach an agreement with your counterparts, you will have a personal self-assurance guaranteed
to undermine the confidence of anyone at the table who is less prepared.

To locate available positions for network managers in small retail firms in the Metropolis area, Felicia contacted the State University Placement Office and visited several Internet sites that list such openings (such as
www.monster.com
). She is deliberately looking for a position with a small, established retail company for two reasons. First, she feels comfortable assuming the responsibility for such a firm’s computer network, based on her education and experience. Second, while Felicia would like to move into the more lucrative private sector and gain new high-tech experience, she would like a position that has fairly regular hours and would not require extensive night and weekend work.

From her inquiries, Felicia has found three suitable openings. How should she optimize her chances of getting interviews? She fears that most commercial companies would not respect her teaching background, although she considers this experience a plus. She prepared a professional resume that lists her educational and employment background. She described her recent computer science teaching and emphasized her ability to explain technical computer concepts to non-technical people. She is certain this will appeal to company officials who know that their network manager must be able to interact effectively with salespeople, warehouse employees, and advertising personnel. She also noted her work in her school district’s computer network.

Felicia’s approach has worked well; she has been contacted by two firms and has arranged interviews, one on Tuesday afternoon, the other Wednesday morning. She plans to take extra resumes with her in case the people interviewing her don’t have copies of the one she sent the firms. She is prepared to detail her knowledge of computer networks, and her ability to convey technical information in understandable terms. From job listings on the Internet, she knows that small retail firm network manager positions pay in the $55,000 to $70,000 range. While she doesn’t have any private sector network experience, she did help to prepare her high school’s advanced homepage and created a school network that allows her and her teaching colleagues to put their course materials and class assignments online.