2. Negotiations as a way to resolve conflicts
Negotiations represent a broad aspect of communication, covering many areas of an individual's activity. As a method of conflict resolution, negotiations are a set of tactics aimed at finding mutually acceptable solutions for the conflicting parties.
In order for negotiations to become possible, certain conditions must be met:
- the existence of interconnectedness of the parties involved in the conflict;
- the absence of a significant difference in strength among the subjects of the conflict;
- compliance of the stage of development of the conflict with the possibilities of negotiations;
– participation in the negotiations of the parties that can actually make decisions in the current situation.
Each conflict in its development goes through several stages (see Table 1), at some of them negotiations may not be accepted, as it is still too early or too late, and only aggressive response actions are possible.
It is believed that it is expedient to conduct negotiations only with those forces that have power in the current situation and can influence the outcome of the event. There are several groups whose interests are affected in the conflict:
primary groups - their personal interests are affected, they themselves participate in the conflict, but the possibility of successful negotiations does not always depend on these groups;
secondary groups - their interests are affected, but these forces do not seek to openly show their interest, their actions are hidden until a certain time. There may also be third forces that are also interested in the conflict, but even more hidden.
Properly organized negotiations go through several stages in sequence:
– preparation for the start of negotiations (before the opening of negotiations);
- preliminary choice of position (initial statements of the participants about their position in these negotiations);
- search for a mutually acceptable solution (psychological struggle, establishing the real position of opponents);
- completion (out of the crisis or negotiation impasse).
Table 1. Possibility of negotiations depending on the stage of the conflict
| Stages of conflict development | Negotiation Opportunities |
| tension disagreement | it is too early to conduct negotiations, not all components of the conflict have been decided yet |
| rivalry hostility | negotiations are rational |
| aggressiveness | third party negotiations |
| war activities | Negotiations are impossible, retaliatory aggressive actions are advisable |
Preparing to start negotiations. Before starting any negotiations, it is extremely important to prepare well for them: to diagnose the state of affairs, determine the strengths and weaknesses of the parties to the conflict, predict the balance of power, find out who will conduct negotiations and the interests of which group they represent.
In addition to collecting information, at this stage it is necessary to clearly formulate your goal and the possible results of participation in the negotiations:
What is the main purpose of the negotiations?
- what options are available. In reality, negotiations are carried out to achieve results for the participants between the most desirable and acceptable;
- if an agreement is not reached, how will this affect the interests of both parties;
- what is the interconnectedness of opponents and how it is expressed externally.
Procedural issues are also being worked out: where is it better to conduct negotiations; what kind of atmosphere is expected; whether a good relationship with an opponent is important in the future.
Experienced negotiators believe that the success of all activities depends on 50% of this stage being properly organized.
Table 2. Possible goals and outcomes of participation in negotiations
| Goal Formulation | Possible results |
| Reflect our interests to the maximum extent | Our most desirable results |
| Consider our interests | Valid Results |
| Practically do not take into account our interests | Unacceptable results |
| Infringe on our interests | Totally unacceptable |
The second stage of negotiations is the initial choice of position (official statements of the participants in the negotiations). This stage allows you to realize two goals of the participants in the negotiation process: to show your opponents that you know their interests and you take them into account, to determine the room for maneuver and try to leave as much space as possible for yourself in it.
Negotiations usually begin with a statement from both sides about their desires and interests. With the help of facts and principled arguments (for example, "objectives of the company", "general interest"), the parties try to strengthen their positions.
If negotiations are held with the participation of a mediator, then he must give each party the opportunity to speak and do everything possible so that the opponents do not interrupt each other.
In addition, the facilitator determines and manages the deterrents: the allowable time for discussion issues, the consequences of the inability to reach a compromise. Suggests ways of making decisions: simple majority, consensus. Identifies procedural issues.
There are various tactics for starting negotiations:
- manifestation of aggressiveness to put pressure on the opponent in the form of an offensive position, an attempt to suppress the opponent;
- to achieve a mutually beneficial compromise, you can use: small concessions, setting deadlines;
- to achieve a small dominance, it is possible to provide new facts; use of manipulation
- establishing positive personal relationships: creating a relaxed friendly atmosphere; facilitating informal discussions; showing interest in the successful completion of negotiations; demonstration of interdependence; the desire not to lose "one's face";
– to achieve procedural ease: search for new information; joint search for alternative solutions.
The third stage of the negotiations is to find a mutually acceptable solution, a psychological struggle.
At this stage, the parties check each other's capabilities, how realistic the requirements of each of the parties are and how their implementation will affect the interests of the other participant. Opponents present facts that are beneficial only to them, declare that they have all sorts of options. Here, various manipulations and psychological pressure on the opposite side are possible, an attempt to put pressure on the mediator, seizing the initiative in all possible ways. The goal of each of the participants is to maintain balance or a little dominance.
The task of the mediator at this stage is to see and put into action possible combinations of the interests of the participants, to contribute to the introduction of a large number of solutions, to direct the negotiations towards the search for specific proposals. In the event that the negotiations begin to take on a harsh character that offends one of the parties, the mediator must find a way out of the situation.
The fourth stage is the completion of negotiations or the exit from the impasse.
By this stage, a significant number of different proposals and options already exist, but agreement on them has not yet been reached. Time begins to run out, tension increases, some kind of decision is required. A few final concessions made by both sides could save the whole thing. But here it is important for the conflicting parties to clearly remember which concessions do not affect the achievement of their main goal, and which nullify all previous work.
On the eve of the Russia-EU summit, Sergey Naryshkin, head of the presidential administration of Russia, arrived in Chisinau on an unofficial visit, Moldavskie Vedomosti writes in an article titled "Communists took revenge on Russia." The Communists turned this visit into a scandal. Evaluations of the visit of the Russian guest varied from "Naryshkin is preparing the communists for opposition" to "the Kremlin intends to push through the coalition of PCRM and PDM." Leaving, Sergei Naryshkin said: “My short visit is connected, of course, with the task of bilateral relations between Russia and Moldova. We understand the difficult socio-economic situation in Moldova, we understand the reasons for the political crisis that led to early parliamentary elections. We see that in the center are the problems of statehood, sovereignty, the search for geopolitical orientation, and we understand that only a strong and truly capable government of Moldova is able to solve these problems, and we would like them to be solved in the context of the strategic partnership between Russia and Moldova »[†].
Solving the problem, as well as negotiating principles and negotiating positions. The concept also assumes that, except for those cases where the parties seek only a general agreement "in principle", it is always necessary to identify and address the main problems. Positional negotiations (the strategy of which is focused on a dispute about specific points or positions in resolving a conflict issue) are not discarded, but only modified to make the satisfaction of interests a motivation, goal, means and result in the case when the main thing is to achieve and support a fair a realistic and lasting solution to the conflict.
It should be noted that cooperative negotiations are not a "soft" form of negotiation, although the process is usually (though not always) more peaceful than traditional positional negotiations, which can often become destructive. Collaborative negotiations are especially beneficial when the implementation of the agreements will require the parties to take mutual responsibility and mutual action, if only to satisfy their own interests.
As for the working definition of negotiations with a collaborative mindset, this process could be roughly divided into three phases or three independent parts:
– adequate communication,
- effective education
- Responsible use of power.
These parts always interact when the conflicting parties are trying to satisfy their own core interests while simultaneously trying to satisfy the core interests of the rival party/parties by making specific proposals (often referred to as negotiating positions) on specific issues. Moreover, these activities can rightfully be called attempts to make, exchange, and fulfill certain promises, since negotiations are basically a promise-making process that leads to realistic and lasting agreements.
Thus, negotiations with an attitude towards cooperation can be a prerequisite for the participation in negotiations of specialists from the mediation service, who, knowing the main causes of conflicts, the rules of conduct in conflict situations, having practical information about deadlocks and much more, will provide real assistance to the disputing parties, while their desire to negotiate to best meet the needs of the conflicting parties.
Fig.1 Thomas-Kilmenn Grid "Conflict Resolution Styles". Let's take a closer look at these styles. Rivalry style: if the police officer is an active person, goes his own way in resolving the conflict, is capable of strong-willed decisions and is not inclined to cooperate, satisfies his interests to the detriment of the interests of others, forces others to accept their own solution to the problem, then he chooses this style. This style...
How to influence the image, therefore, ideally, conflict situations as such should not arise at all. 3.3. The emergence and methods of resolving conflicts between employees in Pushkin Confectionery. In the Pushkin Confectionery, as, of course, in any other catering enterprise in the hotel and restaurant business, a large ...
Negotiations as a way to resolve conflicts
1. Introduction. one
2. General characteristics of the negotiations. one
2. 1 Features of negotiations. one
2.2 Typology of negotiations. one
2. 3 Functions of negotiations. one
4. Ways to resolve the conflict in the organization. Decision making by the leader. one
5. Analysis of the results of negotiations and implementation of the agreements reached. one
6. Conclusion. one
7. References: 1
1. Introduction.
“People are rarely satisfied with those who enter into business negotiations on their behalf, since mediators, trying to acquire a good reputation for themselves, almost always sacrifice the interests of their friends for the sake of the success of the negotiations themselves.” - A quote from the famous French moralist Francois VI de La Rochefoucauld.
Negotiations play an important role in our life. The need for constructive negotiations is growing. At the same time, negotiations are necessary both in the external and in the internal spheres of the company's activities. Negotiation can be seen as the ability to follow one's interests along with the awareness of the inevitability of interdependence.
It should also be noted that the art of negotiation is one of the key aspects of the competitiveness of companies, which today have become part of a complex system of relationships with other organizations. Negotiations are also the most important tool for resolving disagreements, not only between companies, but also within them - whether it be conflicts between individual employees or entire departments.
In this essay, I would like to reveal the main types, types, negotiating strategies, their features. And also pay attention to the negotiations that take place in organizations, how the leader acts during the conflict.
2. 1 Features of negotiations.
Compared to other ways of settling and resolving a conflict, the advantages of negotiation are as follows:
During the negotiation process, there is direct interaction between the parties;
The parties to the conflict have the opportunity to maximally control various aspects of their interaction, including independently setting the time frame and limits of the discussion, influencing the negotiation process and their outcome, determining the scope of the agreement;
loss of one of the parties;
The decision taken, if agreements are reached, often has an unofficial character, being a private matter of the contracting parties;
The specifics of the interaction of the parties to the conflict in the negotiations allows you to maintain confidentiality. The place of negotiations among the various ways of settling and resolving conflicts, differing in the degree of independence of the participants in decision-making and the degree of intervention of a third party.
An important feature of negotiations is that their participants are interdependent. Therefore, making certain efforts, the parties seek to resolve the contradictions that have arisen between them. And these efforts are aimed at a joint search for a solution to the problem. So,
negotiation is a process of interaction between opponents in order to reach an agreed and acceptable solution for the parties.
2.2 Typology of negotiations
Various typologies of negotiations are possible. One of the criteria for classification may be the number of participants. In this case, allocate:
1) bilateral negotiations;
2) multilateral negotiations, when more than two parties take part in the discussion.
Based on the fact of involving a third neutral party or without it, a distinction is made between:
1) direct negotiations - involve the direct interaction of the parties to the conflict;
2) indirect negotiations - involve the intervention of a third party.
Depending on the goals of the negotiators, the following types are distinguished:
Negotiations on the extension of existing agreements - for example, the conflict has become protracted and the parties need a "breather", after which they can begin to communicate more constructively;
Negotiations on redistribution - indicate that one of the parties to the conflict requires changes in their favor at the expense of the other;
Negotiations on the creation of new conditions - we are talking about the extension of the dialogue between the parties to the conflict and the conclusion of new agreements;
Negotiations to achieve side effects - focused on solving secondary issues (distraction, clarification of positions, demonstration of peacefulness, etc.).
2. 3 Functions of negotiations.
1. The main function of negotiations is search for a joint solution to the problem . conflict confrontation has more than a dozen years. For example, the meeting, in October 2009, between the President of the Republic of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan, and the President of the Republic of Turkey, Abdullah Gul. Turkey is seeking to restore diplomatic relations severed in 1993 due to the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh. Turkey made concessions and agreed to normalize relations with Armenia without preconditions.
2. Informational the function is to obtain information about the interests, positions, approaches to solving the problem of the opposite side, as well as provide information about yourself. The significance of this function of negotiations is determined by the fact that it is impossible to come to a mutually acceptable solution without understanding the essence of the problem that caused the conflict, without understanding the true goals, without understanding each other's points of view. The information function can also manifest itself in the fact that one of the parties or both are oriented towards using the Negotiations to misinform opponents.
3 . close to informational communicative
4. An important function of negotiations is . We are talking about the regulation and coordination of the actions of the parties to the conflict. It is implemented, first of all, in those cases when the parties have reached certain agreements, and negotiations are underway on the implementation of decisions. This function also manifests itself when, in order to implement certain rather general solutions, they are specified.
5. negotiations consists in the fact that their participants seek to influence public opinion in order to justify their own actions, present claims to opponents, attract allies to their side, etc.
The creation of public opinion favorable for oneself and negative for the opponent is carried out primarily through the media. An illustration of such involvement of the media can be, for example, negotiations in a situation of conflict between a construction company and an environmental organization regarding the cutting down of a forest area for the use of an area for industrial purposes. If a construction company was able to quickly use this powerful channel of information dissemination and convey to the general public its interpretation of the current situation (using, say, such manipulative techniques as “sticking labels”, “brilliant uncertainty”, “card juggling”, “bandwagon” ), this may strengthen the position of the construction company, despite the negative consequences of the proposed project.
6. Negotiations can also perform a "camouflage" function. This role is assigned, first of all, to negotiations in order to achieve side effects. In this case, the conflicting parties have little interest in jointly solving the problem, since they solve completely different tasks. An example is the peace negotiations between Russia and France in Tilsit in 1807, which caused discontent in both countries. However, both Alexander 1 and Napoleon considered the Tilsit agreements nothing more than a "marriage of convenience", a temporary respite before the inevitable military clash.
3. Stages of conflict development among employees of the organization.
A serious conflict between employees does not arise overnight. It goes through several stages of development, and on which of them the leader intervenes, it depends on whether he will be able to direct the energy of the arguing in the right direction.
Stage 1: guess. The manager learns that new equipment will be installed in the company, as a result of which the number of jobs in his department will be reduced. He suggests that as soon as this information becomes public, there will immediately be debates about how much change is needed, how it should be carried out and how to manage the possible consequences.
Stage 2: Conscious bad premonitions.
Stage 3: discussions. Information about plans to install new equipment has been made public. Employees ask questions to understand what management's intentions are and how final the decision is. During the discussion, it becomes clear that the attitude to this problem is ambiguous: this follows both from the nature of the questions asked and from the remarks of the employees.
Equipment. Disagreements, which had not been clearly articulated before, took shape in the form of specific points of view.
Stage 5: open conflict. Employees have made their positions clear; it is impossible to deny the existence of a conflict further. There are three options for resolving the situation: victory, defeat and compromise. Each of the participants in the dispute tries not only to use the most convincing arguments and strengthen their own influence, but also to weaken the opponent's position.
The intervention of the manager at each of these stages will have different consequences. The most effective it will be at the first stage, the least effective - at the fifth. As the conflict develops, the tools of the leader also change. That is why he needs not only to have an idea of the subject of the dispute and the factors influencing the positions of both parties, but also to determine what stage the differences have reached.
4. Ways to resolve the conflict in the organization. Decision making by the leader.
§ The manager may try to see positive aspects in the presence of disagreements in the organization. By explaining to the parties that each of them, participating in such a discussion, will contribute to solving the problem, the leader will make it clear that in this situation there will be no “winners” and “losers”.
§ The leader can listen carefully to the disputants without evaluating their positions. By listening and trying to understand, the leader sets a good example for the conflicting parties. By using this approach and encouraging the opposing sides to use it, he makes the maximum contribution to transforming the conflict into the search for constructive solutions.
§ The manager can clarify the nature of the disagreement. You are passionately controversial, all the attention of its participants is focused on one thing: facts, methods, goals or values. If one speaks of facts, and the other of methods, anger and irritation arise. The leader must, after listening to the arguments of the parties, clearly describe the subject of the discussion and direct it in a constructive direction.
facts, the facilitator should assist the contestants in checking existing data and finding additional information needed for a more substantive discussion. If the dispute is about methods, the manager can start by reminding the conflicting parties that they have a common task, that at the moment they are discussing means, not ends.
§ The manager may pay special attention to maintaining normal relations between the conflicting parties.
§ The leader can create effective communication channels for the conflicting parties (the parties should be able to communicate freely).
evaluate the essence of the proposal without criticizing its author.
5. Analysis of the results of negotiations and implementation of the agreements reached
the stage of analyzing the results of the negotiations and the implementation of the agreements reached.
First of all, each of the parties needs to analyze the past negotiations, regardless of whether they were successful or not, and decide:
How well the preparations for the negotiations were carried out;
Whether the planned program of negotiations was observed;
What was the nature of the relationship with opponents;
Which arguments were convincing for the opponents, and which ones they rejected and why:
What difficulties arose during the negotiation process;
What negotiation experience can be used in the future;
What are the main reasons for the results achieved.
A visible criterion for the effectiveness of negotiations is the agreement reached, but its presence should not be interpreted as an unconditional success. For evaluating the success of negotiations a number of criteria can be used.
1) The most important indicator of success is the degree of problem solving. The agreement reached during the negotiation process is evidence of a solution to the problem. However, depending on the nature of the agreements the outcome of the confrontation of the parties is different :
Completion of the conflict according to the "win-lose" or "lose-lose" scenario does not exclude conflict interaction in the future.
2) Another important criterion for success is . Negotiations are successful if both sides are satisfied with their results and regard the agreement reached as a fair solution to the problem. However, it is possible that later these measurements will change.
3) The success of the negotiations allows us to evaluate such a criterion as fulfillment of the terms of the agreement. Even the most brilliant result of the negotiations will noticeably fade if there are problems with the fulfillment of the obligations assumed by the parties. Therefore, the best way to ensure the long-term effect of negotiations is to include in the agreement a plan for its implementation. It is important that it clearly stipulates what needs to be done, by what date, by whom. There should also be a system for monitoring the implementation of the agreement. In addition, the final document can also stipulate the procedure for a possible revision of the agreement or its parts. Summing up, it should be noted that the negotiators should start fulfilling their obligations as soon as possible. Since the delay in implementation may cause doubts and mistrust of the parties to each other.
Although relationships with other people should promote peace and harmony, conflicts are inevitable. Every sane person should have the ability to effectively resolve disputes and disagreements so that the fabric of social life is not torn with every conflict, but, on the contrary, is strengthened due to the growth of the ability to find and develop common interests.
To resolve conflict, it is important to have different approaches at your disposal, be able to use them flexibly, go beyond the usual patterns and be sensitive to opportunities and act and think in new ways. At the same time, conflict can be used as a source of life experience, self-education and self-learning.
Conflicts can be great learning material if you take the time to remember what led up to the conflict and what happened in the conflict situation later on. Then you can learn more about yourself, about the people involved in the conflict, or about the surrounding circumstances that contributed to the conflict. This knowledge will help you make the right decision in the future and avoid conflict.
7. References:
1. V. A. Rozanova “Psychology of managerial activity”. Moscow - Alfa - press. 2006
4. Harvard Business Review Classic Series, Negotiation and Conflict Resolution. Moscow 2006.
5. Dubrin E. What does it mean to be a good boss / Per. from English. I. V. Bolgova. - M., 2003, p. 347
Lebedeva M. M. You will have negotiations. - M .: Economics. 1999. S. 37 -38
Conflicts in modern Russia / ed. E. I. Stepanova. – M.: Editorial. 2001 - p. 305
The main positive method of conflict resolution is negotiation. We propose to consider the essential characteristics of the negotiation method and methods of its implementation. Negotiations perform certain functions, covering many aspects of the activities of employees. As a method of conflict resolution, negotiations are a set of tactics aimed at finding mutually acceptable solutions for the conflicting parties. There are several approaches to the definition of the concept of "negotiations". The purpose of this method is that the conflict for a person has a harmful effect, both on the person himself and on his work, on the state of the entire team, on the psychological climate of the team. The parties come to understand the need for negotiations when the confrontation does not produce results or becomes unprofitable. There are two types of negotiations: conducted within the framework of conflict relations and in conditions of cooperation. Negotiations focused on cooperation do not exclude the possibility that the parties may have serious disagreements and on this basis a conflict arises. The opposite situation is also possible, when after the settlement of the conflict, the former rivals begin to cooperate. Negotiations are needed to make joint decisions. Each negotiator decides for himself whether or not to agree to a particular proposal. A joint decision is a single decision that the parties consider to be the best in a given situation.
Depending on what goals the negotiators pursue, there are various functions of negotiations:
Let us consider them in more detail in relation to the problem of negotiations.
The first type of solution is a compromise, when the parties make mutual concessions. This is a typical negotiation decision. The compromise itself is applied in the case when the conflicting people are convinced that there will be no reconciliation. They believe that accepting reconciliation will only exacerbate the situation.
However, more often one encounters situations where the criteria are unclear or the parties cannot find the “middle” in relation to which they can move, giving way to each other. In such cases, it is necessary to look for a field of interest. By making big concessions on an issue that is less important to itself, but more significant to the person, the negotiator gets more on another issue that seems to him the most important. As a result, there is an "exchange" of concessions in the negotiations. It is important that these concessions do not go beyond the minimum values of the interests of both parties. When the statuses, possibilities of power and control, as well as the interests of the parties do not allow them to find a "middle" solution, then the parties can come to a compromise solution. Then the concessions of one side greatly increase the concessions of the other. A person who receives clearly less than half the conditions deliberately goes for it, because otherwise he will suffer even more loss. The correctness of the decision is observed when fixing with the help of negotiations the defeat of one of the parties. The third type of solution is that the negotiators resolve the contradictions by a fundamentally new solution that makes this contradiction irrelevant. This method is based on the analysis of the true balance of interests, which requires painstaking, open and creative work on both sides. This type of decision consists of a joint business judgment of points of view. Looking for solutions that meet the needs and interests of both parties. . Negotiations as a complex process, heterogeneous in terms of tasks, consists of several stages: preparation for negotiations, the process of their conduct, analysis of the results, and implementation of the agreements reached.
Preparing for negotiations
Negotiations begin long before the parties sit down at the table. In fact, they begin from the moment when one of the parties initiates the negotiations and the participants start preparing them. How the negotiations are prepared will largely determine their future and the decisions taken at them. Preparations for the talks are being carried out in two directions: organizational and substantive.
The organizational moments of preparation include: the formation of a delegation, the determination of the time and place of the meeting, the agenda of each meeting, the coordination with interested organizations of issues related to them. The content side of the negotiations includes: analysis of the problem and interests of the participants; formation of a common approach to negotiations and one's own position on them; identification of possible solutions. Before the parties begin to prepare for negotiations, the problem to be solved is analyzed. It is necessary to develop a common approach to negotiations - their concept. When forming a general approach to negotiations, the tasks that will be implemented at them are determined. Possible solutions need to be identified. Participants must think over proposals that correspond to one or another solution. As well as their reasoning. Offers are the key elements of a position. The wording of sentences should be simple and free from ambiguity.
Negotiation
Negotiations begin from the moment when the parties begin to discuss, consider and discuss the problem. In order to navigate the situation of negotiations, it is necessary to understand well, to think over what the process of interaction is when seeing the negotiations, what stages it consists of. There are three stages of negotiation:
clarification of interests, concepts and positions of participants;
discussion (substantiation of one's views and proposals);
coordination of positions and development of agreements.
In the course of clarifying interests and positions, information uncertainty on the problem under discussion is removed. There is a "common language" with a negotiating partner. When discussing issues, it is necessary to make sure that by the same term the parties understand the same, and not different things. The clarification stage is manifested in the presentation of positions by the parties and the provision of explanations for them. By making proposals, the parties thereby determine their priorities, their understanding of possible ways to solve the problem. The stage of discussion (argumentation) is aimed at justifying one's own position as clearly as possible. It acquires special significance if the parties are guided by the solution of the problem through compromise. The discussion is a logical continuation of the clarification of positions. The parties, by putting forward arguments during the discussion, expressing assessments of the partners' proposals, show what and why they fundamentally disagree with or, on the contrary, what may be the subject of further discussion. If the parties seek to resolve the problem through negotiations, then the result of the argumentation stage should be the definition of the scope of a possible agreement.
The third stage - the coordination of positions
There are two phases of coordination: first, the coordination of the general formula, and then the details. When developing a mutual agreement, and then when considering it, the parties go through all three stages, as it were: clarification of positions, their discussion and agreement.
Of course, the selected stages do not always follow strictly one after another. Clarifying positions, the parties can agree on issues or defend their point of view. At the end of the negotiations, the participants can again move on to clarify individual elements of their positions. However, in general, the logic of the negotiations should be preserved. Its violation can lead to delaying negotiations and even their failure. The final period of the negotiation process is the analysis of the results and the implementation of the agreements reached. It is generally accepted that if the parties signed a certain document, then the negotiations were not in vain. But the existence of an agreement does not make the negotiations successful, and its absence does not always mean their failure. Subjective assessments of negotiations and their results are the most important indicator of the success of negotiations. Negotiations can be considered successful if both sides appreciate their results. Another important indicator of the success of negotiations is the extent to which the problem has been resolved. Successful negotiation involves solving the problem, but participants may see how the problem is solved in different ways.
The third indicator of the success of negotiations is the fulfillment by both parties of their obligations. The negotiations have ended, but the interaction of the parties continues. The decisions made are to be implemented. During this period, an idea is formed about the reliability of a recent opponent, about how strictly he follows the agreement.
After the completion of the negotiations, it is necessary to analyze their content and procedural side, i.e. discuss:
what facilitated the negotiation;
what difficulties arose and how they were overcome;
what was not taken into account when preparing for negotiations and why;
what was the behavior of the opponent in the negotiations;
what negotiation experience can be used .
Psychological mechanisms of conducting the negotiation process.
There are the following mechanisms: coordination of goals and interests; striving for mutual trust of the parties; ensuring a balance of power and mutual control of the parties.
Alignment of goals and interests. Negotiation becomes negotiation or discussion through the operation of this mechanism. Whatever scheme the negotiations are organized in, they can achieve results only through the coordination of goals and interests. The degree of the result achieved can be different: from full consideration of interest to partial. In these cases, negotiations are considered successful. If the negotiations did not end with an agreement, this does not mean that there was no agreement. Just during the negotiation, the opponents could not agree.
The essence of the mechanism is that the parties, on the basis of alternately putting forward and substantiating their goals and interests, discussing their compatibility, develop an agreed common goal.
Coordination of goals and interests is more effective if:
orientation of the parties to the solution of the problem;
good or neutral interpersonal relations of opponents;
open positions, presentation of clear individual goals;
ability to adjust goals.
The search for common ground and the development of a common goal have a positive effect on the normalization of the relationship of opponents, lead to a calm, rational, and, consequently, productive conflict resolution.
Striving for mutual trust of the parties. When the conflict has occurred or continues, it is difficult to talk about any trust of the parties. Awareness by the parties of the need to resolve the problem peacefully, i.e. through negotiations, launches a mechanism for establishing mutual trust. Another psychological negotiation mechanism is to ensure a balance of power and mutual control of the parties. This lies in the fact that during the negotiations the parties seek to maintain the initial or emerging balance of power and control over the actions of the other side. A significant influence on the balance of power is exerted not only by the real capabilities of the other side, but also by how these opportunities are perceived. In negotiations, it is often not the power that the participant really has that matters, but how it is assessed by the other side.
In negotiations, each side tries to make the most of its opportunities. The range of means involved is quite wide: from persuasion to threats and blackmail. However, thanks to maintaining the balance of power, negotiations are underway. If one of the parties sharply increases its power, then the opponent either takes a time out or stops the negotiations. It is also possible to resume conflict actions.
The considered methods of managing conflict situations are especially relevant in such small organizations as "LLC" TRADING HOUSE "STM". The main recommendations for the prevention and prevention of conflicts in the organization "LLC" TRADING HOUSE "STM". The adoption of sound management decisions is the most important condition for preventing conflicts at all levels. Conflicts are not caused by the decisions themselves, but by the contradictions that arise when they are implemented. Before deciding how to act in a given situation, it is necessary to do certain work, which has its own sequence and stages. The first stage in the preparation of a management decision is the construction of an information model of the current state of the control object. An information model that describes the current state of the control object allows you to answer the question: "What is there?". The point is not only to obtain detailed information about the control object, but also to ensure that this information objectively reflects both positive and negative aspects in its state. To make an effective management decision, it is important to identify trends in the development of the management object to date. At the second stage of preparing the solution, an answer is given to the question: why, for what reasons, is the control object in the state it is in? This model is called explanatory and allows you to answer the question: "Why is that?".
When justifying a management decision, it is important to be able not only to identify key, main and secondary factors. It is necessary to soberly assess which of them can be influenced most significantly. Before making a management decision, it is necessary to make a forecast of the control object. Mentally imagine and evaluate possible options for the development of the control object in the future, thereby building a predictive model. It allows you to answer the question: “What will happen?”.
The forecast should assume three main options for future changes in the control object:
1) the future under the condition of the most unfavorable set of circumstances: the worst possible scenario;
2) the best possible scenario for the development of events;
3) the most probable forecast for the development of the control object.
The fourth stage of preparing decisions is called building goal models. This model allows you to answer the question: “What do we want?”.
In order for the goals not to turn into idle slogans, it is necessary to develop clear criteria for achieving goals at all levels.
Once the goals are defined, management decisions can be made. It should answer the question "What to do?". The sixth stage in making a managerial decision is the answer to the question: "How to do it?".
Implementation of the decision into practice is the seventh, most difficult stage of management activity. The eighth stage is the evaluation of the performance results. The next ninth stage is the decision to continue or terminate the activity. The last, tenth stage is a generalization of the experience gained. This is also an independent very important stage, since learning by doing is practically one of the most effective ways to improve the performance of a leader. Assessing the state of affairs in the organization, it is necessary first of all to determine the condition of the people working in it, their quantity and quality. It is important to assess their professional readiness, moral qualities, goals and interests, identify social groups and the nature of relationships both within groups and between them, determine group interests, etc. Thus, sound management decisions, competent management of employees and teams are important conditions for preventing conflicts between people, maintaining a good socio-psychological climate in teams. Competent from a psychological point of view, management, competent mutual assessment by superiors and subordinates of the results of employees' activities can prevent a significant part of conflicts between them. The main positive method of conflict resolution is negotiation.
There are three types of joint decisions of negotiators:
compromise, or "middle solution";
asymmetric solution, relative compromise;
finding a fundamentally new solution through cooperation.
There are various approaches to the classification of negotiations. One of them is based on the allocation of various goals of their participants.
1. Negotiations on the extension of existing agreements.
2. Negotiations on normalization. They are carried out with the aim of transferring conflict relations to more constructive communication of opponents. Often conducted with the participation of a third party.
3. Negotiations for redistribution. One of the parties demands changes in their favor at the expense of the other. These demands are usually accompanied by threats from the attacking side.
4. Negotiations on the creation of new conditions. Their goal is to form new relationships, conclude new agreements.
5. Negotiate to achieve side effects. Secondary issues are resolved (demonstration of peacefulness, clarification of positions, diversion of attention, etc.).
Depending on the goals pursued by the negotiators, there are various functions of negotiations.
informational (the parties are interested in the exchange of views, but are not ready for joint actions for any reason);
communicative (establishing new connections, relationships);
regulation and coordination of actions;
control (for example, regarding the implementation of agreements);
distraction (one of the parties seeks to buy time to regroup and build up forces);
propaganda (allows one of the parties to show itself in a favorable light in the eyes of the public);
delays (one of the parties goes to negotiations in order to inspire hope in the opponent to solve the problem, to calm her down).
Negotiations as a complex process, heterogeneous in terms of tasks, consists of several stages: preparation for negotiations, the process of their conduct, analysis of the results, and implementation of the agreements reached.
Psychological mechanisms of conducting the negotiation process. There are the following mechanisms: coordination of goals and interests; striving for mutual trust of the parties; ensuring a balance of power and mutual control of the parties. Another psychological negotiation mechanism is to ensure a balance of power and mutual control of the parties. This lies in the fact that during the negotiations the parties seek to maintain the initial or emerging balance of power and control over the actions of the other side. In this organization, the director needs to show rigidity and control over subordinates. The director of this enterprise faces the problem of choosing tactics to influence an individual employee, how an employee can behave in a given situation, what will be the behavior and, most importantly, the reaction of a person. Thus, the head of the enterprise must take into account the characteristics of each employee individually, his psychological traits, character, empathy for people, behavior in a team. The manager asks himself two questions: “How long will it take me to prove my point?” and “With what strength and activity will I communicate with other people?” The developed program makes it possible to present everything that directly concerns the conflict itself and the participants in conflict actions. When conducting and analyzing this work, the director must each time carefully and reliably prepare for all upcoming conversations, meetings and negotiations with conflicting people. The director should without fail identify the conflicting parties to the conflict, who is more prone to conflict, and who constantly turns out to be a kind of “scapegoat”. This topic allows you to identify troublemakers for the organization.
General characteristics of the negotiations
The use of negotiation, direct or mediated, to resolve conflicts is as old as the conflicts themselves. However, they became the object of extensive scientific research only in the second half of the 20th century, when special attention began to be paid to the art of negotiation. The pioneer of such studies is a French diplomat of the 18th century. François de Callières is the author of the first book on negotiations (“On the Way of Negotiating with Monarchs”).
In a conflict situation, its participants are faced with a choice: either focus on unilateral actions (and in this case each of the parties builds its behavior independently of each other), or joint actions with the opponent (i.e. express the intention to resolve the conflict through direct negotiations or with the assistance of a third party).
features of negotiations.
Compared to other ways of settling and resolving a conflict, the advantages of negotiation are as follows:
During the negotiation process, there is direct interaction between the parties;
the parties to the conflict have the opportunity to maximally control various aspects of their interaction, including independently setting the time frame and limits of the discussion, influencing the negotiation process and their outcome, and determining the scope of the agreement;
negotiations allow the parties to the conflict to develop an agreement that would satisfy each of the parties and avoid a lengthy litigation that may end in the loss of one of the parties;
The decision taken, if agreements are reached, often has an unofficial character, being a private matter of the contracting parties;
the specifics of the interaction of the parties to the conflict in the negotiations allows you to maintain confidentiality. The place of negotiations among the various ways of settling and resolving conflicts, differing in the degree of independence of the participants in decision-making and the degree of intervention of a third party.
An important feature of negotiations is that their participants are interdependent. Therefore, making certain efforts, the parties seek to resolve the contradictions that have arisen between them. And these efforts are aimed at a joint search for a solution to the problem. So, negotiations are a process of interaction between opponents in order to reach an agreed and acceptable solution for the parties.
Typology of negotiations
Various typologies of negotiations are possible. One of the criteria for classification may be the number of participants.
In this case, allocate:
1) bilateral negotiations;
2) multilateral negotiations, when more than two parties take part in the discussion.
Based on the fact of involving a third neutral party or without it, a distinction is made between:
1) direct negotiations - involve the direct interaction of the parties to the conflict;
2) indirect negotiations - involve the intervention of a third party.
Depending on the goals of the negotiators, the following types are distinguished:
1) negotiations on the extension of existing agreements - for example, the conflict has become protracted and the parties need a “breather”, after which they can begin more constructive communication;
2) redistribution negotiations - indicate that one of the parties to the conflict requires changes in its favor at the expense of the other;
3) negotiations on the creation of new conditions - we are talking about the extension of the dialogue between the parties to the conflict and the conclusion of new agreements;
4) negotiations to achieve side effects - focused on solving secondary issues (distraction, clarification of positions, demonstration of peacefulness, etc.).
Negotiation functions
Depending on the goals of the participants, various functions of negotiations are distinguished, analyzed in detail by M.M. Lebedeva.
1 The main function of negotiations is to find a joint solution to the problem. This is what, in fact, negotiations are underway. The complex interweaving of interests and failures in unilateral actions can push even outright enemies, whose conflict confrontation has been going on for more than a dozen years, to start the negotiation process. A striking example is the talks held in 2000 between the heads of two Korean states - North Korea and South Korea - states that have been in a state of fierce confrontation for almost half a century and separated by a concrete wall, like the Berlin one.
2 The information function is to obtain information about the interests, positions, approaches to solving the problem of the opposite side, as well as provide information about yourself. The significance of this function of negotiations is determined by the fact that it is impossible to come to a mutually acceptable solution without understanding the essence of the problem that caused the conflict, without understanding the true goals, without understanding each other's points of view. The information function can also manifest itself in the fact that one of the parties or both are oriented towards using the Negotiations to misinform opponents.
3 Close to the informational communicative function associated with the establishment and maintenance of links and relations between the conflicting parties.
4 An important function of negotiation is regulatory. We are talking about the regulation and coordination of the actions of the parties to the conflict. It is implemented, first of all, in those cases when the parties have reached certain agreements, and negotiations are underway on the implementation of decisions. This function also manifests itself when, in order to implement certain rather general solutions, they are specified.
5 The propagandistic function of negotiations is that their participants seek to influence in order to justify their own actions, present claims to opponents, attract allies to their side, etc.
The creation of public opinion favorable for oneself and negative for the opponent is carried out primarily through the media. An illustration of such involvement of the media can be, for example, negotiations in a situation of conflict between a construction company and an environmental organization regarding the cutting down of a forest area for the use of an area for industrial purposes. If a construction company was able to quickly use this powerful channel of information dissemination and convey to the general public its interpretation of the current situation (using, say, such manipulative techniques as “sticking labels”, “brilliant uncertainty”, “card manipulation”, “bandwagon” ), this may strengthen the position of the construction company, despite the negative consequences of the proposed project.
The propaganda function is used especially intensively in negotiations on domestic and foreign policy issues. However, the openness of such negotiations may also reduce their effectiveness. It can be very difficult for the parties to reach agreements under pressure from public opinion, from outside influence in general, when the masses whose interests they represent “continue wearily to carry the banners of the previous struggle.” Therefore, such negotiations are often conducted in a confidential setting. 6 Negotiations can also perform a “camouflage” function. This role is assigned, first of all, to negotiations in order to achieve side effects. In this case, the conflicting parties have little interest in jointly solving the problem, since they solve completely different tasks. An example is the peace negotiations between Russia and France in Tilsit in 1807, which caused discontent in both countries. However, both Alexander 1 and Napoleon considered the Tilsit agreements nothing more than a “marriage of convenience”, a temporary respite before the inevitable military clash.
The “camouflage” function is most clearly realized if one of the conflicting parties seeks to calm the opponent, buy time, and create the appearance of a desire for cooperation. So, in the XIV century, during the period of aggravation of relations with the Golden Horde of Tver
