Active Listening and Negotiation

Negotiation Skill

Negotiations

The 'negotiation' process, entailing conflicting parties' deliberation over the problem and arrival at a conclusion that works to all parties' advantage, constitutes a highly effective means of preventing tension and disputes. Disagreeing persons sit together, engage in open-forum problem discussion, bargain or negotiate, and arrive at a result satisfactory to every party. Successful communication leads to successful negotiation. Negotiations should be free from yelling and brawling; parties ought to peacefully exchange beliefs, views and feelings. Nobody can know one's ideas and feelings if one doesn't express them effectively before others. People's manner of speaking and non-verbal cues (gestures, posture, facial expression, etc.) contributes significantly to successful negotiations (MSG, 2016).

The UPS (United Parcel Service) Strike of 1996 Win-Lose Negotiation

American courier/messenger service business established in the year 1907, the UPS, is now the world's biggest courier, specialized transport and logistics firm. Its key corporate strategy was: largely recruiting youngsters seeking part-time employment, offering them off-time shift work, and paying them union-negotiated compensation packages. But irrespective of how long they served the company, they had scant opportunities of career progress with UPS. By the year 1996, the company was employing 182,000 individuals part-time, working approximately 26 to 28 hours weekly for about 5 years at largely part-time pay rates. UPS workers' Teamster Union thoroughly examined the problem and initiated an enormous offensive worker strike against the company, relying on societal support (Ciel, 2011).

The Moscow Theater Hostage - Crisis Negotiation

Approximately fifty Chechen Islamic militants carrying weapons held 850 Russian residents captive in a theater in the year 2002, calling for Russian withdrawal from Chechnya, and the cessation of the 2nd Chechen War. While Russian soldiers attempted negotiations, the government strictly demanded the release of their civilian hostages, irrespective of their ethnicity. Negotiations were only partly effective, however, as the terrorists only let about 150- 200 kids, pregnant ladies, the sick, and individuals needing medical attention go. Meanwhile, Russian authorities provided the militants refuge in any underdeveloped nation of their choice.

Ongoing negotiations led to the release of a further thirty-nine innocents held, in addition to the release of every foreigner, whose ambassador entered the negotiation process. The trickling release of groups of hostages didn't help the scenario within the theater. Stressed hostages started independently attacking the terrorists. Ultimately, authorities implemented a siege, pumping aerosol anesthetics into the building's ventilation shafts. These negotiations may be considered somewhat ineffective in that 129 innocents lost their lives. The example poses collateral damage aspects as, despite all endeavors, the outcome wasn't wholly positive and casualties were unavoidable.

Why the Successful Negotiation Was Effective and Why the Unsuccessful Negotiation Was Not Effective

The UPS Strike of 1996 Win-Lose Negotiation

UPS unionized employees and Teamster Union negotiators undertook a thorough study of part-time employees' statutory rights and Union-UPS contract clauses. They compared part-time employees' ratios/proportions with those of full-time personnel, including salary, full-time employment prospects, and retirement fund inequalities, and developed a campaign manifesto reflecting the economic imbalance between the company's full- and part-time workforces. Careful and complete preparation before entering into negotiations is imperative. The negotiations in this case were successful, owing to adequate preparation by one party.

The Moscow Theater Hostage - Crisis Negotiation

Negotiations in this case suffered from numerous huge mistakes and important opportunities lost by Russian authorities. The foremost, and probably greatest, misstep was their hesitancy or incompetence in establishing sound communication. Moreover, communication link reliability would have improved their chances of forming rapport as well as familiarity with militants. Active listening and expressing an understanding of and sympathy for Chechnya's situation was missing; had the Russians done so, the militants would have felt somebody understood their sentiments, was trustworthy, and could assist them. Negotiations in this case chiefly took place over a hostage's phone as well as directly. Besides these channels, the militants voiced numerous demands through indirect media like journalists, released captives, media interviews, the militants' webpage, and previously filmed videos.

Suggestions That Could Have Positively Affected the Outcome

The Moscow Theater Hostage - Crisis Negotiation

The Russian government could have acted cleverly by persuading militants that their plan was already a success, since the entire world was now aware of their cause, but the global public could rapidly turn against them should they harm any hostage. Although such a tactic would probably have been refuted, authorities could, as a subsequent step, challenge the militants to an 'honorable' fight against their real enemy and not innocent citizens. This alternative of letting the hostages go and facing open combat could have satisfied the militants. Although this is definitely not an attractive alternative, it was a better negotiation tactic to the one actually adopted, and could have successfully averted the loss of innocent lives (Dolnik & Pilch, 2003).

The Role of Personality Attributes in the Selected Negotiations

In achieving success in negotiations, an imposing, charming personality is closely connected to efficient communication. Scholars have recently begun raising doubts regarding the traditional assumption that negotiation/bargaining and personality are unrelated. Apparently, many Big Five characteristics result in positive negotiation results. For instance, gregarious or affable negotiators succeed in distributive bargaining, owing to their tendency to impart necessary facts. Further, mood also plays a role in negotiations. Negotiators expressing positive emotions enjoy more favorable outcomes compared to neutral ones as they are inclined to be more trusting, thereby reaching joint-gain agreements more often.

How Communication Affected the Outcomes of the Negotiations

The UPS Strike of 1996 Win-Lose Negotiation

As union negotiators, could effectively formulate a clear list of arguments and demands aimed at making part-time jobs full-time, reducing salary gaps for full- and part- time work, improving employee safety conditions, and ensuring job security, they could concentrate on, and effectually express, their main needs.

The Moscow Theater Hostage - Crisis Negotiation

Russian authorities seemed to have occasionally communicated indirectly with the militants sending messages via public media channels to them as they were sure those inside the theatre had their eyes on the TV broadcasts. A chief issue of their chosen communication vehicle was its heavy reliance on proxies who, although praiseworthy for their bravery and willingness to assist the rescue effort, lacked training and instructions regarding required behavior, actions to avoid, steps to take in particular scenarios, and how to convey their message. There was no competent chief negotiator at all, engaged in major discussions with militants. On the whole, the negotiators used received virtually no overall support and direction.

Identify the Different Ways in Which a Negotiator May Try to Influence the Other Party.

Negotiation power impacts two basic neurological behavior regulators, namely, behavioral inhibition and approach systems. Effective negotiators display the latter type of behaviors including positive mood expression and seeking rewards within the environment. On the other hand, ineffective negotiators undergo considerable self-inhibition, caused by the fear of possible threats. Four ways in which negotiators can successfully influence the conflicting party are explained below (The President and Fellows of Harvard College, 2016).

Reframing Questions

Negotiators can ask questions to reframe, check the conflicting side's understanding of the negotiator's stand, and request for more positive restatements of points. Personal attacks must be reinterpreted as attacks on the problem for avoiding further conflict.

Responding Rather than Reacting

Effective negotiators handle their emotions well, do not argue on all blames, criticisms, pressures or challenges, and allow the opposite party to withdraw without suffering humiliation.

Re-focusing on the Problem

A successful negotiator maintains a cordial relationship and attempts to solve the problem by summarizing progress made, reviewing agreement and shared views to date, and concentrating on establishing a "partnership" in resolving the issue. Effective negotiators also segregate the problem into different parts, deal with easy components first, invite bargaining, and analyze the worst and best options.