17-1

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

CHAPTER SEVENTEEN

Managing Negotiation Impasses

17-2

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

The Nature of “Difficult to Resolve” Negotiations and Why They Occur• The nature of impasse• Causes of impasses and intractable negotiations• Characteristics of the parties• Characteristics of the issues• Characteristics of the environment• Characteristics of the negotiation setting• Characteristics of the conflict resolution process

17-3

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

The Role of Power in Impasses

17-4

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

The Nature of Impasse

Impasse is a condition or state of the conflict in which there is no apparent quick or easy resolution

• Impasse is not necessarily bad or destructive• Impasse does not have to be permanent• Impasse can be tactical or genuine

– Tactical impasse: parties deliberately refuse to proceed as a way to gain leverage

– Genuine impasse: parties feel unable to move forward without sacrificing something important

17-5

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

The Nature of Impasse

• Impasse perceptions can differ from reality– The perception of impasse can be created by an

intransigent negotiator who is looking to extract concessions from the other party

– Intransigence can be defined as a party’s unwillingness to move to any fallback position through concession or compromise

17-6

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

What Causes Impasses and Intractable Negotiations?

A negotiation becomes more tractable when it becomes easier to resolve, and intractable when it is more difficult to resolve

• Intractable conflicts vary along four dimensions– Divisiveness– Intensity– Pervasiveness– Complexity

17-7

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Characteristics of the Parties

• How one defines one’s self

• Comparing one’s self to others

• Perceptions of power

• Revenge and anger

• Conflict management style

17-8

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Characteristics of the Parties

• How one defines one’s self– Identity - “who am I?”

– Conflict occurs when people’s identities are threatened

• Comparing one’s self to others– Characterization - “Who are they?”

– Blame others when things go wrong, take credit for successes

• Perceptions of power– A negotiator may bargain tough because they believe they can

effectively exercise coercive power

17-9

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Characteristics of the Parties

• Revenge and anger– To correct injustice– To stand up and express one’s self-worth – To deter future occurrences of undesirable behaviors

• Conflict management style– Parties often avoid conflict in creative ways:

• Aggressive avoidance— intimidate others to keep them away

• Passive avoidance—try to ignore the other• Passive aggressive avoidance—- blame the other party and

walk away

17-10

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Characteristics of the Parties

• Conflict management style (cont.)• Avoidance by claiming hopelessness — “What’s the

use…..”• Avoidance through surrogates — use a ‘surrogate’ to take

the other on• Avoidance through denial — make believe it isn’t there• Avoidance through premature problem solving —“I fixed

everything”• Avoidance by folding — “We’ll do it your way; now can

we talk about something else?”

17-11

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Characteristics of theNegotiation Context

• The negotiation setting– Changing locations can be a new start

• Temporal (time) issues – Earlier compromises re-packaged may break impasse

• Relational issues – Replacing an aggressive team member can signal

change• Cultural issues

– Changing strategy can change attitudes (i.e. bring in a mediator)

17-12

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Characteristics of the Issues

• Value differences– Vary from minor differences to major differences in

ideology, lifestyle, of what is considered sacred and critical

• High stakes distributive bargaining– Parties may have inflated their negotiating positions to the

point where there is no apparent zone of agreement

• Risk to human health and safety– The threat to human welfare is clear and apparent

17-13

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Characteristics of the Negotiation Setting

Negotiation settings include:• Temporal issues

• Relational issues

• Cultural issues

17-14

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Characteristics of the Conflict Resolution Process

Processes that increase the likelihood of impasse:– The atmosphere is charged with anger, frustration and

resentment– Channels of communication are closed or constrained– Original issues at stake have become blurred and ill defined– Parties tend to perceive great differences in their respective

positions– As anger and tension increase, parties become locked in their

initial positions– Those on the same side view each other favorably.

17-15

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Fundamental Mistakes that Cause Impasses

• Neglecting the other side’s problem• Too much of a focus on price• Positions over interests• Too much focus on common ground• Neglecting BATNAs• Adjusting perceptions during the negotiation

17-16

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

How to Resolve Impasses

Impasses need to be resolved on three levels:

• Cognitive resolution– Change how the parties view the situation

• Emotional resolution– Change how the parties feel about the impasse

• Behavioral resolution– Specify ways the parties can stop difficult conflict

dynamics

17-17

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Strategies for Resolving Impasses

• Reach agreement on rules and procedures• Reduce tension and synchronize de-escalation of

hostility• Improve the accuracy of communication• Control the number and size of issues• Establish common ground• Enhance the desirability of options and

alternatives

17-18

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Strategies for Resolving Impasses

• Agreement on rules and procedures– Obtain mutual agreement about the rules that will govern

the negotiation

– Determine a site for a meeting

– Set a formal agenda

– Determine who may attend the meetings

– Set time limits for individual meetings

– Set procedural rules

– Follow specific do’s and don’ts

17-19

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Strategies for Resolving Impasses

• Reducing tension and synchronizing de-escalation– Separate the parties

– Manage tension

– Acknowledge the other’s feelings: active listening

– Synchronize de-escalation• Decide on a small concession that each side could make to

signal good faith

17-20

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Strategies for Resolving Impasses

• Improving the accuracy of communication– Role reversal

– Imaging: parties describe1. how they see themselves

2. how the other party appears to them

3. how they think the other party would describe them

4. how they think the other party sees themselves

17-21

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Strategies for Resolving Impasses

• Controlling issues– Fractionate the negotiation

• Reduce the number of parties on each side

• Control the number of substantive issues involved

• State issues in concrete terms rather than as principles

• Restrict the precedents involved, both procedural and substantive

• Search for ways to fractionate the big issues

• Depersonalize issues: Separate them from the parties advocating them

17-22

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Strategies for Resolving Impasses

• Establishing common ground– Superordinate goals

– Common enemies

– Common expectations

– Manage time constraints and deadlines

– Reframe the parties view of each other

– Build trust

– Search for semantic resolutions

– Use analogical reasoning

17-23

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Strategies for Resolving Impasses

• Enhancing the desirability of options to the other party – Give the other party a “yesable” proposal

– Ask for a different decision

– Sweeten the offer rather than intensifying the threat

– Use legitimacy or objective criteria to evaluate solutions

17-24

McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved

Fisher’s “Demand Dynamics”