« Brainstorming as Part of the Negotiation Process | Main | Negotiating the BOTTOM LINE »
October 16, 2006
BRACKETING tactics in Negotiations
When using heavy artillery against a grizzly bear, it is normal to shoot long, then short to establish the range and effect of the wind, then “walk” the rounds down until the grizzly is effectively de-clawed. Unless of course, if he is charging. In which case you should fire for effect without delay!
As a dispute resolution strategy, bracketing is an effective way to resolve differences. It is also the most heavily used approach in negotiations. It encompasses establishing “bid/ask” positions between the parties then working for a common ground, typically somewhere in the middle of the initial “bid/ask” parameters. The important aspect of bracketing is determining what your opening position should be.
A mediator's first challenge is to get the parties to open with reasonable offers to settle. This will likely be accomplished in private, working with one side then the other. While the objective of these breakout sessions is to generate an opening bid, the mediator will also be trying to learn what other issues are important to each party. It is these ancillary issues that often pose the greatest potential for settlement.
The initial offer or counter needs to be carefully considered. As most negotiations are not life and death situations, each party has the right to walk away and save time if they feel there is no chance of reaching an agreement. So the opening offer and counter need to either be within reality or one's bottom line if that is what is required to keep the discussions alive. By preparing and doing your research you should have a reasonably good idea of what it will take to reach an agreement. Your initial offer should reflect some reasonableness in that regard.
It is the number one tactic in bracketing to not make the initial offer. Getting the other person to make the first bid takes time, communication skills, and manipulation. The art of negotiation is not as much in the numbers as it is in the human skills of getting the other person to do what you want them to do. In this case, make the initial offer. That offer, when made, will tell you a lot. It establishes the expectations, knowledge, confidence and need for the deal of the other person. Take the time necessary to try to get the other person to make the first offer.
Once the opening bids are established, the mediator will need to formulate how he presents each bid to the other party in the best light so that the offer is not rejected but countered. This is where ancillary issues can be used. That is, when presenting a unusually high bid, the mediator may say to the other side, “While this may seem high, you have told me this is not really about money. So let’s see if we can resolve the other issues and then come back to the money.” What the mediator is doing is expanding the scope of the negotiations to their widest parameters. He will then work to bring the parties together by "horse-trading” issues and monetary considerations until both can justify accepting the final terms.
There is an art to bracketing. Moving too quickly will result in giving up too much. The amount of each concession also signals when the parties are getting close to their final positions. A mediator needs to be sensitive to this and work to always leave a door open for "just one more" concession if necessary.
Don't forget that time is a major commodity. The final concessions may have to be extracted by using the gambit, “We have so much invested in this session, one more small concession has got to be worth considering.”
There are those times when you know you have to make a ridiculously low or high initial offer. The goal is to keep the dialogue going so you can sway the other person toward your bottom line. When you have to make an unreasonable offer, use the following delivery techniques to preserve the dialogue:
- Prepare the other party up front for the offer.
- Establish a relationship through preparatory dialogue.
- Desensitize the number using some humor in the delivery.
- Do not tender the offer with equivocation; deliver it with confidence.
- Explain the merits of the offer during the delivery.
Remember, you don't know the other person's situation or knowledge base. While your offer may be seemingly ridiculous, the other person may have pressures or needs that make it viable.
Negotiations are not easy. They are interpersonal conflicts that need to be managed. If they were easy we would all be living happy, healthy, wealthy lives with perfect families, burgeoning bank accounts, and ideal career paths.
Posted by Bill at October 16, 2006 2:49 PM
Comments
Negotiations are exchange of views and they involve most of the time compromises because each party especially between unions and employers, want to exercise its power, protect and defend their positions so that they can please the people they negotiate on behalf of. Parties in negotiations take into account the survival of the organisation, so whatever agreement they reach/make will benefits all the parties involved.
Negotiations is used to express our feeling nad views on certain things that we want and sometimes we dont have, so try to negotiate for them in order to get them by forcing or convincing the other party. Yes I partially agree with the utilisation of tactics and strategies during negotiations, but I dont see these as the the way to win one party, because all parties know their limitations as far as I concern, so what they will do is to ensure that they stick to that they have meaning they won't go beyond that no matter what, because they will feel that if they exceed whatever they planned, these will show incapabilities of negotiating.
Parties in negotiations they just protect their positions, but ussually a party that has more power in the case of employment (the employer) will always be in the most best positions when negotiating for fair exchange of wage, becuase is the one who controls most of the resources in the company.
That is my view on NEGOTIATIONS. Nickname Lion
Posted by: J.L. Mpkgoatlheng at June 7, 2007 2:44 AM
Your comments are duly noted. Many people feel that they have no power to negotiate against their employers, the government or other vestiges of power. This is unfortunate as these people do negotiate solely to protect their positions as you have said.
The true purpose of a negotiation should be to improve your situation. You have to believe in that potential to properly pursue it.
In your example of a company having power over the employee I suggest that the employee can garner equal power by seeking alternate sources of employment before entering into a negotiation with his or her boss about a raise or promotion.
By merely having other options you possess power. Don't forget you are trained. You are an established employee who knows the ropes and who has proven to be able to work within the corporate system. To lose you and hire another person will cost the company time, energy and money.
It is your right to seek to improve your situation. Don't fear being discovered in your search for another job. You are merely doing your due diligence to see what your "worth" is on the open market. Most employers don't want this to happen as it forces them to give you a reasonable increase or lose you.
So the issue is how can you garner enough power to feel that you have the opportunity to negotiate to do more than simply hold on to the status quo. Preparation is the key. That and having the intestinal fortitude to be willing to threat leaving if you aren't compensated properly.
Posted by: Bill at June 9, 2007 11:48 AM