Negotiating a group vacation: scheduling, location, and budget

Negotiation

A Few Days in the Sun

We are all familiar with the process of negotiation: We have each been engaging in negotiations since we were young children asking to stay up just five more minutes before going to bed. However, despite the fact that by the time that we are adults we have each engaged in probably thousands of negotiations, few people have ever stopped to analyze exactly what goes on in a negotiation. This paper examines the steps of a negotiation that I myself was involved in. This negotiation centered on a vacation that I was trying to arrange with a small group of friends. The following analysis lays out the steps that are followed in a negotiation regardless of whether the topic is intrinsically inconsequential or momentarily serious.

Process of negotiation

The negotiation process did indeed begin smoothly, with short, unambiguous questions and replies circulating among us. However, as it became increasingly clear that we were assuming points of agreement that were not in fact in existence. Once it became clear that we were not communicating as well as we would like we decided to have our first conference call. We hoped that shifting the medium of communication would reduce the amount of heat in the negotiations. Email often increases the degree of miscommunication while simultaneously increasing the level of irritation (or worse) with others because their communications can be seen as willful attempts to stymie the other negotiators.

One of the steps that I took whenever emails seemed to be doing significant harm to the process rather than moving it forward was to try to enrich the communication and continually to emphasize the framework that we truly did want to vacation together. I also reminded people that they should ask for clarification whenever they wanted to, not only because such clarification could provide explicitly needed factual information but also created a "culture of negotiation" that favored cooperation over bellicosity.

One of the important tasks at this stage was to create a scoring system and to use this to improve my BANTA: I was attempting to expand my knowledge about my friends' positions and BANTA because this knowledge would expand my options, which always increases the chance for a (more) successful negotiation. During each of the negotiations I attempted to discover more about the BANTAs of each person.

Since it was clear from the beginning that cost would be a key sticking point, I asked D. If he would be willing to supplement the cost for the two of us who made the least amount of money. While he initially disliked this option, I suggested that we create a scoring system that helped each of us assess how good a "deal" we each were getting. The $1,200 price was worth five points. If D. contributed at least $300 to the others, then he would receive an additional point while the others would lose one point. D (or others) would lose one point for bringing along work to do.

Whoever made the arrangements would earn two points for doing this work, but only after everyone else in the group agreed to the arrangements and only when two complete agenda were "submitted." In deciding where what our destination the highest number of points would prevail, the points being added up in terms of everyone voting for a particular destination. This seemed to be the simplest way to create an even playing field. Such a stance on my part was most likely not only to produce a good outcome but also to leave all of my partners feeling that they had been treated with respect. A successful negotiation leaves people feeling both that they have gotten the best deal and that they have been treated as being just as important as everyone else in the negotiation.

By establishing values for each aspect of the vacation -- the price, the site, etc. -- I tried to create the maximum degree of flexibility and options for each person. Adding options and therefore adding flexibility is nearly always a way to improve the outcome of a negotiation both because it creates more possible "correct" solutions and because it allows different parties to agree to at least one solution in a way that makes them feel that their needs/wishes have been met.

Throughout the process I tried to serve as an anchor and create an atmosphere of cooperation and collegiality. I pursued these goals by creating an atmosphere of cooperation and trust. I asked different members of the group what they honestly wished the outcome to be and then served (to the best of my abilities) as an honest broker in representing their concerns to other members of the group. I tried to ask specific diagnostic questions, allowing each person to clarify as precisely as possible what it was that he wanted. This process of diagnostic inquiry helped to create a sense of mutuality as well as helping each person to gain a better idea of what it was that he actually wanted from the vacation and what his priorities were in terms of criteria for a good vacation.

Throughout the process I worked to create coalitions that spanned multiple issues to make them as strong as possible and emphasized the rewards of being part of a coalition as well as the emotional costs of not belonging to one, repeatedly emphasizing the virtue of reciprocity. I linked this particular negotiation to the larger relationships that we engage in so that the larger framework of our long-term friendship help dissipate what could then be seen as relatively small differences.

Overall, I believed that all of us acted quite well in terms of this negotiation. I feel that this exercise overall has made me much more aware of the steps that go on all the time but that I had never thought about in any detail before. Being more aware of them will help me in negotiations in the future, especially if I remember that negotiation is not a question of who wins/who loses but a sincere attempt to create a solution for all parties, each of whom brings something of value to the table.