Multiple parties negotiation

Solo disponible en BuenasTareas
  • Páginas : 6 (1393 palabras )
  • Descarga(s) : 0
  • Publicado : 7 de octubre de 2010
Leer documento completo
Vista previa del texto

* Multiparty negotiations=two or more parties are working together to achieve a colletive objective
* Each party has his own preferences and priorities
* They might agree to make a single collective decision ,or agree to align togetherin subgroups, or might go by separated.
* Dynamics are unique in multipartynegotiations

I. Differences between 2party and multiparty negotiations

1.Number or parties
* More negotiators at table=challenge for managing different perspectives and egalitarianism .
* Each party represents its own interests
* Diferent social roles inside the parties
* Unequal levels of power
* If parties are equals exchange within the negotiation should be more open2.Informational and Computational complexity
* More issues
* More total info
* Situation tends to become less lucid, more demanding: More values and interests to be integrated.

3.Social complexity
* Social environment changes=from dialogue(one2one) to small groups discussions(multiparty)
* Dynamics of small groups affect the negotiator’ behavior
* Parties withcooperative motivational orientation were more likely to achieve a higher-quality outcome.
* Social pressures=act cohesively or not.
* Strong pressures for conformity develop as some members pressure other members to adopt a common perspective or definition of the problem= can develop dysfunctional group dynamics.
4. Procedural Complexity
* Process more complicated=Procedural rules becomefar less clear (“whose turn is it to do that”).
* More time must be allowed for negotiations=More parties more out of control the process can become
* Parties must decide how they want to approach multiple issues on the table= group that approached issues simultaneously, generally exchange more info
5. Strategic Complexity
* Negotiators must consider the strategies of all the parties,(instead just one) and decide whether to deal with each of them separately or as a group= Usually evolves into a series of one2onenegotiations, but conducted within the audience of all other group members.
* Exchanges between parties are subject to surveillance by the audience
* Negotiator may be sensitive to being observed, , felling the need of appear tough. The social environmentlead negotiators to adopt distributive strategies simply to show their toughness. Negotiation becomes strongly positional in an competitive escalation.

* Negotiators who have some way to control the number of the parties at the table may begin to act strategically in order to serve their objectives. The tactics used will be determined by the strategic interest. Additional parties may beinvited to add support, to provide “independent “testimony or support to a point of view, or simply to present a show of force

* Negotiators can engage in coalition building in order to add collective weight
* Emergence of consensus proceeds as Snowballing coalition= coalitions are built one party at a time.

II. What is an effective group
multiparty negotiation looks a lot like groupdecisión making- understanding multiparty negotiations means, in part, understand the attributes of an effective group:
* Test assumptions and inferences
* Unchecked assumptions and inferences coan lead to unfounded conclusions
* Share as much relevant info as possible
* Focus on interests , not in positions
* Explain the reasons behind one’s statements, questions and answers* Be specific.
* Use examples
* Agree on the meaning of important words.
* Participants should be careful to fully explain and define key words or language that may be part of the agreement .
* Disagree openly with any member of the group.
* Disagreement can be productive without being offensive
* Make statements, then invite questions and comments.
tracking img