A632.4.4.RB_MaceRoyce
During the course of negotiations, people often misrepresent information to gain at least a temporary advantage. For example, a seller may fabricate existence of another interested buyer or a buyer may misrepresent the price and availability of an item from a different vendor. Reflect on deceptions in negotiations and describe four ways to evaluate information during negotiations. Relate an example of a recent negotiation in which you have been misled and one in which you may have overstated a claim.; define how far you would be willing to go to leverage your position.
While there are six different ways to evaluate information during negotiations, the four that I will focus on are "establishing trust", "asking direct questions", "paying attention to nonverbal cues", and "keeping records and getting things in writing" (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001). Starting off, trust is vitally important in negotiations. It establishes a baseline for seamless negotiations without the need for deception and will decrease the likelihood that others will employ defensive justification, i.e. deceptive negotiation tactics.
A second way to evaluate information during evaluations is to ask direct questions. This helps to avoid lies via commission and omission, but especially lies by omission. A simple example of this would be a situation where a customer goes to buy a vehicle from a private party. If the buyer is focused on and asks specifically about a the exact gas mileage that the car gets, then the owner is more likely to divulge that information. Had the buyer not asked and the gas mileage average was less than desirable, then the buyer likely would have omitted the gas mileage altogether in negotiation with the buyer. It is seemingly helpful to ask questions about the less desirable aspects of the negotiation (things that worry you or you are unsure about) or those parts of the negotiation that are most important (things that you value and must have as a result of the negotiation).
The third way that we can evaluate information during negotiations is to pay attention to nonverbal cues. Hoch et al. (2001) state that nonverbal cues are more revealing than verbal cues. Increased blinking, increased sweating, and conflicting microexpressions are just a few examples of visual, nonverbal cues that can reveal deception. While somebody sweating profusely during negotiations may indeed be trying their hand at deceptive negotiations, we must remember to not be overconfident in our abilities to detect deception as detecting lies is many times very difficult (Hoch et al., 2001).
The fourth and final tool in which to evaluate information during negotiations comes in the form of keeping records and getting things in writing. As exemplified by Hoch et al. (2001), Textron was able to effectively deceive an opposing union as a result of negotiation because no contract or official documentation was written. The union only had the word of Textron which proved to do very little in the legal system. In today's fast-paced and "make money" world, it is of the utmost importance that legal documentation and notarization take place for important matters and issues we face as individuals, organizations, and even as families.
In regards to a situation where I have been mislead and that I have done the misleading... The most recent memory where both instances actually occurred at the same time was the sale of my home last year. My real estate agent also happened to be a friend of mine and was very optimistic that my home would appraise very high. He assured me that the home would appraise around the asking price that I was looking for.
My goal was to sell high as it was a seller's market. In the end, the home appraised lower than we wanted and my friend, the real estate agent, admitted to somewhat misleading me on the appraisal price, He admitted that he had been hoping that the home would appraise for the amount we wanted, but he had mislead me on his guarantee as not to upset me before the appraisal had actually occurred. My happiness was his happiness, so he reluctantly agreed that the appraisal would come in as high as the price that we were asking for the property.
On the other end, the buyer was thrilled that the appraisal came in lower. The amount that the buyer now had to come out of pocket decreased significantly (they were not approved for a loan covering the full cost of the house). As we started to negotiate price, I had at one point told my realtor that I was dead set on a price. This wasn't actually true due to the pressures of selling the house in a timely fashion.
The buyers called my bluff and came in a bit lower than I wanted. I had tried to mislead the buyers into thinking that I could hold out on the price for a longer period of time, but that was simply not the case as I unloaded as quickly as I could. I decided not to leverage my position very long because a lot of time and money had been invested in the property already and it had served its purpose, so I was willing to let the property go without much of a fight. In the end, the home was a great investment property and I felt good about the equity that had been gained, so deception in negotiations really had no value to me at that point and I'm sure the other party felt the same way.
References
Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making decisions.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
While there are six different ways to evaluate information during negotiations, the four that I will focus on are "establishing trust", "asking direct questions", "paying attention to nonverbal cues", and "keeping records and getting things in writing" (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001). Starting off, trust is vitally important in negotiations. It establishes a baseline for seamless negotiations without the need for deception and will decrease the likelihood that others will employ defensive justification, i.e. deceptive negotiation tactics.
A second way to evaluate information during evaluations is to ask direct questions. This helps to avoid lies via commission and omission, but especially lies by omission. A simple example of this would be a situation where a customer goes to buy a vehicle from a private party. If the buyer is focused on and asks specifically about a the exact gas mileage that the car gets, then the owner is more likely to divulge that information. Had the buyer not asked and the gas mileage average was less than desirable, then the buyer likely would have omitted the gas mileage altogether in negotiation with the buyer. It is seemingly helpful to ask questions about the less desirable aspects of the negotiation (things that worry you or you are unsure about) or those parts of the negotiation that are most important (things that you value and must have as a result of the negotiation).
The third way that we can evaluate information during negotiations is to pay attention to nonverbal cues. Hoch et al. (2001) state that nonverbal cues are more revealing than verbal cues. Increased blinking, increased sweating, and conflicting microexpressions are just a few examples of visual, nonverbal cues that can reveal deception. While somebody sweating profusely during negotiations may indeed be trying their hand at deceptive negotiations, we must remember to not be overconfident in our abilities to detect deception as detecting lies is many times very difficult (Hoch et al., 2001).
The fourth and final tool in which to evaluate information during negotiations comes in the form of keeping records and getting things in writing. As exemplified by Hoch et al. (2001), Textron was able to effectively deceive an opposing union as a result of negotiation because no contract or official documentation was written. The union only had the word of Textron which proved to do very little in the legal system. In today's fast-paced and "make money" world, it is of the utmost importance that legal documentation and notarization take place for important matters and issues we face as individuals, organizations, and even as families.
In regards to a situation where I have been mislead and that I have done the misleading... The most recent memory where both instances actually occurred at the same time was the sale of my home last year. My real estate agent also happened to be a friend of mine and was very optimistic that my home would appraise very high. He assured me that the home would appraise around the asking price that I was looking for.
My goal was to sell high as it was a seller's market. In the end, the home appraised lower than we wanted and my friend, the real estate agent, admitted to somewhat misleading me on the appraisal price, He admitted that he had been hoping that the home would appraise for the amount we wanted, but he had mislead me on his guarantee as not to upset me before the appraisal had actually occurred. My happiness was his happiness, so he reluctantly agreed that the appraisal would come in as high as the price that we were asking for the property.
On the other end, the buyer was thrilled that the appraisal came in lower. The amount that the buyer now had to come out of pocket decreased significantly (they were not approved for a loan covering the full cost of the house). As we started to negotiate price, I had at one point told my realtor that I was dead set on a price. This wasn't actually true due to the pressures of selling the house in a timely fashion.
The buyers called my bluff and came in a bit lower than I wanted. I had tried to mislead the buyers into thinking that I could hold out on the price for a longer period of time, but that was simply not the case as I unloaded as quickly as I could. I decided not to leverage my position very long because a lot of time and money had been invested in the property already and it had served its purpose, so I was willing to let the property go without much of a fight. In the end, the home was a great investment property and I felt good about the equity that had been gained, so deception in negotiations really had no value to me at that point and I'm sure the other party felt the same way.
References
Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making decisions.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Comments
Post a Comment