After
reading Chapter 11 of the Wharton text, I realized that there are many subjects
of information on a negotiation that negotiators tend to lie or misrepresent
during the negotiation. The difference between lies and misrepresentation
depend on the outcome or purpose for which the information was withheld.
Telling lies by omission means that negotiators will not reveal information to
the opposite party during a negotiation, while telling lies by commission is
the act of actively misrepresenting information to the negotiating party (Hoch,
Kunreuther & Gunther, 2001). There are 4 classified types of information
that can be misrepresented during a negotiation: reservation prices, interest,
intentions, and material facts.
A reservation price is another term for “bottom line” of
a company. Basically, negotiators of a company misrepresent the information of
the actual “bottom line” of the company in order to make the decision more
lucrative or appealing to the opposite negotiating party. Interest is referred
to as the misrepresentation of the seller or buyer’s true interests. During
negotiating efforts offers are made and more often than not one of the party’s
involved will misrepresent their true interests in order to make the sale or
make the sale happen quicker. An intention in this case is referred to as
having a hidden agenda, where one of the involved parties has other intentions
with the gain of the sale or result of the negotiation. If the other party has
an idea of the negotiating party’s hidden agenda, they can call their bluff and
force them to act appropriately. The last classified type of information is the
most serious of all misrepresentations, material facts. These types of lies or
misrepresentation of information on material facts actually constitute to a
level of fraud during the negotiation. Typically, the events of the negotiation
and the “knowing of misrepresentation of material facts” help determine the
gravity in which fraud was conducted and authorities tend to get involved as
well to determine the outcome of the situation.
Authors Hoch, Kunreuther & Gunther provide various
alternatives and/or tips for: the preparation of a negotiation, what to look
for during the negotiation, and what to do after the negotiation. During the
negotiation it is important for the negotiator to ask direct questions to the
opposite negotiating party. By asking direct questions the negotiator ensures
that the opposite negotiating party is not lying or misrepresenting the
information in order to win on the negotiation. A second important tactic for
the negotiator is to listen carefully to the person making the negotiation. It
is important to pay attention to what is being said and what is not being said
on the negotiating table. Negotiators who feel like they may get caught
misrepresenting information will begin choosing their words more carefully and
begin to leave certain details out of the negotiating table in order to keep
their advantage.
The third most important tip used for during the
negotiation is to pay attention to nonverbal cues. Humans communicate more
clearly and more often in nonverbal cues. Paying attention to these cues will
reveal to the negotiator if the opposite negotiating party is anxious, nervous,
lying, or misrepresenting information. In my opinion, certain individuals tend
to talk on a higher pitch when lying or when feeling caught sort of speak.
These and more are the types of cues to pay attention for in order to figure
out if you are being deceived during a negotiation. The last important tip is
to keep records and get things in writing. During the negotiation, it’s
important to keep written records of the demands, accusations, claims, results
of what is being negotiated. Written records will help avoid any
misunderstandings during the negotiation and each party will have a clear idea
which item or product is being negotiated on.
During a recent small negotiation between one of the
coworkers and me, I was asked by the coworker to stay until her regular end
shift time as she would be leaving during my regular shift end time in order to
go to the doctors. I was mislead by this coworker as later that night I found through
Facebook that this coworker had left work early to go to the casino.
An example of an event in which I overstated a claim,
would be when negotiating with my supervisor on who should be working the late
shift whenever an employee from the night shift calls out. Typically, before my
position, I was always involuntarily made to stay the extra shift in order to
help cover the empty position. Now with my position, I do volunteer from time
to time to stay behind for an extra shift. But, when others do not volunteer my
supervisor automatically tries to count me in to fill the position. At this
time, I begin to overstate the many times that I have helped her by staying
behind for an extra shift even though I had school early the next day or
assignments due that same night. Reflecting back on the times that I have
overstated my claim, I realize that I have only gone as far as misrepresenting
certain doctor appointment information in order to only stay my regular shift.
In other words, in certain occasions my doctor appointments were not until 5pm,
I would tell my supervisor my appointment time was 4pm so I was only be able to
stay an extra 30 minutes after my shift. Even though I misrepresented or lied
of commission, on this type of information it allowed me more time for me to
finish or start part of my assignments before leaving for the doctors.
Source:
Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H., & Gunther, R.
E. (2001). Deception in Negotiations.
Wharton
on Making Decisions (pp. 188 – 197). New York: Wiley.
No comments:
Post a Comment