How to separate the people from the problem? - Chapter 2

Why is it better to separate the people from the problem?

Negotiators are human beings with emotions, deeply held values, and different backgrounds and viewpoints. Humans are prone to cognitive biases, partisan perceptions, and unpredictability. The human aspect of negotiation can be good or bad. In a negotiation where it is good there can be trust, understanding, and respect, and negotiations can be smooth and efficient. In a negotiation where it is bad, people can be angry, fearful, frustrated, and offended. There may be misinterpretations and prejudices and a vicious circle of counter reactions that causes negotiations to fail.

What role does an ongoing relationship between the participants play in a negotiation?

Negotiators have an interest in the substance, but also often in the relationship with the other. Most negotiations take place in the context of an ongoing relationship where it is important not to hinder future relations and negotiations. However, the relationship often becomes entangled with the problem and the participants tend to treat the people and the problem as one. Ego becomes involved and anger over a situation may lead to anger to the human being associated with the problem. Especially positional bargaining puts relationships in conflict and makes it more difficult to separate the people from the problem.

How to separate the people from the negotiation?

Both the substance of the negotiation and the ongoing relationship can be worked on, but participants should be committed to dealing with both these aspects separately. The problem of the people should not be solved with substantive concessions. Most people problems fall into one of these three categories: perception, emotion, and communication. The relationship between the participants should be based on mutually understood perspectives, two-way communication, and expressing emotions without blame. These three categories and their influence on the negotiation will be discussed further now.

What role does perception play in dealing with the people problem?

Looking for an objective reality can be very useful, but it is ultimately the reality as each side sees it that constitutes the problem in a negotiation. Even when facts are established, they may not help in any way to solve the problem. Each participant's perceptions are probably one-sided and people tend to focus on what confirms their own perceptions and disregard that what questions their perceptions. This hinders coming to a wise agreement.

What techniques with regards to perception can be used to better deal with the people problem and improve the negotiation?

The following are recommendations with regards to perception and the positive effects they may have on dealing with the people problem:

• See the situation as the other side sees it. Understanding another's point of view is not the same as agreeing with it. It simply allows you to reduce the area of conflict by understanding empathetically the power of the point of view of the other and the emotional force with which they believe in it.
• Do not deduce the other's intentions from your fears. People tend to assume that whatever it is they fear, the other side intends to do. Suspicious interpretations often follow naturally from one's existing perceptions, but they stand in the way of dealing with the people problem. It disregards new ideas in the direction of agreement and causes subtle changes of position to be ignored.
• Do not use blame. Even if blaming is justified, it is counterproductive and tends to entangle even more the people with the problem.
• Discuss each other's perceptions in a frank and honest manner without using blame.
• Look for opportunities to act inconsistently with the other's perceptions. A good way of changing someone's perceptions is to act in a way that the other does not expect.
• All participants should be included in the process. Even if an outcome seems favorable, it is less likely to be accepted by the other side if they were not involved in drafting it. They may be suspicious or upset about having been excluded. Both sides should have a feeling of participation, making the process of negotiation stronger and the personal attachment to the solution greater.
• Face-saving. Face-saving has a negative connotation, when actually it simply reflects people's need to reconcile the stand taken in a negotiation with their existing principles and past words and actions. Sometimes it is better to rephrase or re-conceptualize an idea so that it sounds consistent with the values of the participants, even though internally it does not change much.

What role does emotion play in dealing with the people problem?

Emotions play a very big role in dealing with the people problem. When people are angry they are more prepared to fight than to cooperatively negotiate. The stakes can be high and people may feel threatened. Emotions on one side often lead to more emotions on the other side and can quickly bring a negotiation to its end, without even proper addressing the substance of the negotiation.

What techniques with regards to emotion can be used to better deal with the people problem and improve the negotiation?

• Recognize and understand the emotions of both sides. It may be useful to write the emotions down. There may be issues that are sensitive. The causes of the emotions should be investigated (for example why someone is feeling angry, are they feeling threatened in some way?).
• Many emotions in a negotiation are driven by a core set of five concerns. Damage to these core concerns tends to cause strong negative emotions and needs to be attended to. The core concerns are autonomy (the desire to make your own choices), appreciation (the desire to be recognized and valued), affiliation (the desire to belong as an accepted member of a group), role (the desire to have a meaningful purpose), and status (the desire to feel fairly seen and acknowledged).
• Consider the role of identity. A perceived threat to identity can also cause strong negative emotions.
• Make emotions explicit and legitimize them. This will not only underscore the seriousness of the problem, but also make the negotiation less reactive.
• Let the other let off steam and do not react to emotional outbursts with another emotional reaction. Through recounting their grievances to an attentive audience they may obtain psychological release. Encouraging the speaker to let it out leaves no emotions to fester.
• Use symbolic gestures. Acts that produce a constructive emotional impact on the other side often cost very little or nothing at all and may improve a hostile emotional situation. Think of a note of sympathy, a handshake, a hug, or a dinner.

What role does communication play in dealing with the people problem?

Negotiation is a process of communicating back and forth for the purpose of reaching a joint decision. There are three big problems in communication. Firstly, participants may not be talking to each other (they may have given up on each other and are basically talking to third parties). Secondly, the participants may not be hearing each other (they are not paying attention to each other). Thirdly, the participants may misunderstand each other. Without good communication, there may not be any negotiation and a wise agreement may not be reached.

What techniques with regards to communication can be used to better deal with the people problem and improve the negotiation?

• Listen actively and acknowledge what is being said. Pay close attention, ask the other to explain clearly what they mean, and if necessary repeat what they have just said. It enables you to understand the other's perceptions and emotions, and gives the other the satisfaction of being heard and understood.
• Speak to be understood without assigning blame or raising your voice. It may be more comfortable sometimes to meet in a more private place. Also, the less people that are involved, the better.
• Speak about yourself, not the other. Making a statement that the other believes to be untrue may cause negative emotions in the other. However, a statement about how you or your side feels is difficult to challenge. It conveys the same information without provoking a defensive reaction that will prevent the other side from taking it in.
• Before making a significant statement, you should know what you want to communicate or find out, and know what purpose that information will serve. Sometimes too much is being said and it may hinder the negotiation.

What can be done to prevent people's problems from becoming a big problem?

A few recommendations are made to prevent people's problems from becoming a mayor issue that could endanger reaching an agreement:

• Build a personal and organizational relationship between the participants that is strong enough to deal with the negotiation.
• Structuring the negotiating game in a way that disentangles the substantive problem from the relationship and protects people's egos.