Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Crisis Negotiations
There are numerous stages in a crisis scenarios. Crises can be seen as happening in stages that have different characteristics and require different skills to manage" (McMains & Mullins, 2010, p.25). These stages are: pre-crisis, crisis/defusing, adaptation/negotiation, and resolution/surrender (McMains & Mullins, 2010, p.25). Pre-crisis does not refer to a specific event, but to an organization prior to a crisis. It is characterized by practice, planning, and prevention by the negotiators and their support teams (McMains & Mullins, 2010, p.25). The crisis/defusing stage involves the recognition that there is a crisis and the negotiators attempts to deescalate the situation into one where there can be negotiation. It is during this time period that negotiators often assess whether a crisis is negotiable. They also assess the nature of the crisis: it is not considered a hostage scenario unless human life is at stake, even if the taker is threatening inanimate objects or non-human living creatures. They use the following techniques during the crisis/defusing stage: reassurance, active listening, emotional...
All of these tools are aimed at establishing a relationship between the negotiator and the taker. This facilitates the growth of the next stage, which is the adaptation/negotiation stage. In many ways, the negotiator is working as a facilitator for the hostage taker, helping the hostage taker realize that he or she has alternatives to the scenario that they have established. Negotiators use: open ended questions, problem-oriented questions, persuasion and influence techniques, and I-messages in this phase to help transition to problem solving (McMains & Mullins, 2010, p.25). The final stage is the resolution/surrender phase, which is ideally characterized by the release of any hostages and the peaceful surrender of the taker. The goal of this stage is a peaceful resolution and managing increasing tensions. Negotiators use guided imagery and stress management techniques to help maintain emotional stability during this phase of a crisis (McMains & Mullins, 2010, p.25).
Police bargaining in crisis…
References
McMains, M.J. & Mullins, W.C. (2010). Crisis negotiations (4th ed). New Providence, NJ:
LexisNexis/Anderson.
Hostage Negotiation Keeping people as hostages has happened all through history. In the recent years, political events in Algeria, Kenya and Vietnam show examples of such terrible acts. Criminals, mentally challenged, prisoners are usually the people involved in hostage taking. Hostage crises have prevailed due to escalations of family member-on-member, family member-on-employee, intoxicated colleague, household dispute situations, disturbed client-on-employee and disturbed employee-on-client violence at workplace. Those involved in hostage taking activities
Hostage Negotiations Following the deadly aftermath/fallout from the Attica prison riot in New York State in 1971 -- and from the bloody terrorist attack during the 1972 Olympic Games in Germany -- there have been attempts to change the way in which authorities go about crisis negotiation. This paper discusses the responses that authorities have had to these crisis situations and outlines the steps that have been taken to improve the
Deception techniques & lying There are situations in which lying or other deception techniques are used and are allowed as negotiation technique to save possible loss of life or to avert other such critical situations. Certain experts do not encourage the use of such techniques. Some say that lying or deception can only be used as last resort. The idea of using deception techniques if used regularly and randomly may damage
Hostage Negotiation The 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments have had serious impacts on modern hostage negotiations and will be examined in this paper. Elements that are to be considered include promise making, incriminating statements, as well as the planting of listening devices. Graham vs. Connor, State vs. Sands, and Taylor vs. Watters, among others, are some of the court cases that will be used in this discussion. Again, the impact of
Crises Negotiations The field of hostage negotiating did not develop on the front lines of police work, but, instead, in the broader political context, dealing specifically with the taking of hostages. In modern times, these events have been large-scale terrorist events, such as when terrorist took athletes hostage at the 1972 Munich Olympics. This helped hone the field of hostage negotiations, because of a belief that appropriate intervention and negotiation could
The secondary negotiator is also responsible for maintaining a more detached perspective than the primary and helping the primary remain objective and uninvolved on a personal psychological level (Schmalleger, 2008; Wind, 1995). One of the primary tools employed by hostage negotiators are information obtained about the underlying motives and psychological makeup of the hostage takers because that understanding enables them to structure their negotiating posture in the manner most conducive