Negotiations 6e mcgraw hill chapter 9

Questions of Ethical Conduct that Arise in Negotiation • Using ethically ambiguous tactics: It’s mostly all about the truth p.. 273 – & Box 9.2 – The purpose of using ethically ambiguou

McGraw - Hill/Irw in Cop y right © 201 0 by The McGraw - Hill Com p anies, Inc A ll rights reserv ed

CHAPTER NINE Ethics in Negotiation

What Do We Mean by Ethics and

Why Do They Matter in Negotiation?

Ethics: p.254

• Are broadly applied social standards for what is right

or wrong in a particular situation, or a process for

setting those standards

• Grow out of particular philosophies which

– Define the nature of the world in which we live

– Prescribe rules for living together

9-3

– The rightness of an action is determined by one’s

obligation to adhere to consistent principles, laws and

social standards that define what is right and wrong

Four Approaches

to Ethical Reasoning

• Social contract ethics p 262

– The rightness of an action is based on the customs and

norms of a particular society or community

• Personalistic ethics p 263

– The rightness of the action is based on one’s own

conscience and moral standards

9-5

Questions of Ethical Conduct

that Arise in Negotiation

• Using ethically ambiguous tactics: It’s (mostly) all

about the truth p 265

• What does Carr say about not telling the truth in

negotiations?

– Misrepresentation to an opponents network

– Inappropriate information collection

Questions of Ethical Conduct

that Arise in Negotiation

• Deception by omission versus commission

– Omission – failing to disclose information that would

benefit the other

– Commission – actually lying about the common-value

issue p 270

– Many people are more willing to lie by omission than

commission

Ethics – Deceptive Tactics

• Individuals are more willing to use deceptive tactic

when the other party is perceived to be uniformed

or unknowledgeable about the situation under

negotiations -Especially when the stakes are

high

Why Use Deceptive Tactics?

Motives and Consequences

• The power motive p 273 – & Box 9.2

– The purpose of using ethically ambiguous negotiating

tactics is to increase the negotiator’s power in the

bargaining environment

• Other motives to behave unethically p 273

– Negotiators are more likely to see ethically ambiguous

tactics as appropriate if they anticipate that the other’s expected motivation would be more competitive

The Consequences of Unethical Conduct p 274

A negotiator who employs an unethical tactic will

experience positive or negative consequences The

consequences are based on:

• Effectiveness – whether the tactic is effective p 274

• Reactions of others – how the other person,

constituencies, and audiences evaluate the tactic p

275

• Reactions of self – how the negotiator evaluates the

tactic, feels about using the tactic p 276

9-11

Explanations and Justifications

– To verbalize some good, legitimate

reason why this tactic was necessary

Rationalizations for

• The tactic was unavoidable

• The tactic was harmless

• The tactic will help to avoid negative consequences

• The tactic will produce good consequences, or the

tactic is altruistically motivated

• “They had it coming,” or “They deserve it,” or “I’m

just getting my due”

9-13

Rationalizations for

• “They were going to do it anyway, so I will do it

first”

• “He started it”

• The tactic is fair or appropriate to the situation

What Factors Shape a Negotiator’s

Predisposition to Use Unethical Tactics?

• Demographic factors p 279

– Sex p 281

• Women tend to make more ethically rigorous

judgments than men

– Age and experience p 281

• Both men and women behave more ethically as they

age

• Individuals with more general work experience, and

with direct work experience, are less likely to use unethical negotiating tactics

9-15

What Factors Shape a Negotiator’s

Predisposition to Use Unethical Tactics?

• Demographic factors (cont.)

– Professional orientation p 281

• People in different professions differ on judgments

of perceived appropriateness

– Nationality and culture p 282 (very interesting)

• Significant differences are found across different

nationalities and cultural backgrounds

• Not in book—class discussion

– Those that are committed to a religion are less likely to

be unethical than those younger or uncommitted to a religious commitment.

What Factors Shape a Negotiator’s

Predisposition to Use Unethical Tactics?

• Are more likely to lie when they need to

• Better able to lie without feeling anxious about it

What Factors Shape a Negotiator’s

Predisposition to Use Unethical Tactics?

• Personality differences (cont.)

– Locus of control p 284

• The degree to which individuals believe that the

outcomes they obtain are largely a result of their own ability and effort (internal control) versus fate

or chance (external control)

• Individuals who are high in internal control are

more likely to do what they think is right

9-19

What Factors Shape a Negotiator’s

Predisposition to Use Unethical Tactics?

P 285

• Contextual influences on unethical conduct

– Past experience

– Role of incentives

– Characteristics of the other party

– Relationship between the negotiator and the other party – Relative power between the negotiators

– Mode of communication

How Can Negotiators Deal With the Other Party’s Use of Deception?

P 291

• Ask probing questions

• Phrase questions in different ways

• Force the other party to lie or back off

• Test the other party

• “Call” the tactic

• Ignore the tactic

• Discuss what you see and offer to help the other party change to more honest behaviors

• Respond in kind

9-21