The course enables students to learn about both the negotiation process and actually how to negotiate. In order to understand the rules that govern the interpersonal decision-making process that is negotiation, it is essential to have an in-depth understanding of the two sides of negotiation: the distribution of value and the creation of value.
This course begins by introducing students to the pervasive nature of negotiation and some of the common myths and misconceptions that limit the potential benefits that can be gained through effective negotiation. It then delves into the concept of distribution value and the specific tactics that can be employed in order to arrive at the most favorable outcome. Students will then explore value creation and how to implement tactics to move from a win-lose scenario to a win-win. The course will then offer insights drawn from game theory (including the prisoner’s dilemma, the “stag hunt game,” the “tit-for-tat” strategy) before concluding with a focused exploration of how to manage the process of implementing negotiation theory in practice, avoiding pitfalls and allowing for effective negotiation learning.
Course Objectives and Outcome:
On successful completion of this course, students will be able to:
- Describe the process of negotiation and the interconnected but opposing processes of value distribution and value creation.
- Recognize common myths and misconceptions regarding negotiation and negotiators and take measures to avoid common pitfalls.
- Apply empirical insights about the process of negotiation to negotiation scenarios.
- Negotiate with various other parties using value distribution and value creation tactics.
- Engage in a process of self-reflection and utilize a variety of tools to improve performance as a novice negotiator.
The learning materials include printed and online course books, vodcasts, online knowledge tests, podcasts, online tutorials, and case studies. This range of learning materials is offered to students so they can study at a time, place, and pace that best suits their circumstances and individual learning style.
1. The Significance and Nature of Negotiation
1.1 The Nature and Types of Negotiation
1.2 Misconceptions About Negotiation and Myths About Negotiators
2. The Distribution of Value
2.1 The Pie: Zone of Possible Agreement
2.2 Slicing the Pie: Maximizing Distributive Outcomes
3. Distributive Negotiation Tactics
3.1 Distributive Negotiation To-Dos
3.2 Learning Transfer
4. The Creation of Value
4.1 Value Creation: From Win-Lose to Win-Win
4.2 The Four Steps and the Three Types of Value Creation
5. Value Creation Negotiation Tactics
5.2 Value Creation Negotiation To-Dos
6. The Negotiator’s Dilemma
6.1 The Dilemma Between Creating and Distributing Value
6.2 The Prisoner’s Dilemma as a Metaphor for the Negotiator’s Dilemma
6.3 Coping Strategies: Tit-for-Tat Strategy and Changing Payoffs
7. Learning to Negotiate
7.1 From Theory to Practice
7.2 Three Challenges to Learning to Negotiate
7.3 A Model for Negotiation Learning
• Bazerman, M. H., & Neale, M. A. (1993). Negotiating rationally. New York: The Free Press.
• Berkel, G. (2013). Contract management. In M. Kleinaltenkamp, W. Plinke, & I. Geiger (Eds.), Business project management and marketing: Mastering business markets. Heidelberg: Springer.
• Berkel, G. (2015). Deal Mediation: Erfolgsfaktoren professioneller Vertragsverhandlungen. Zeitschrift für Konfliktmanagement, 18(1), 4–7.
• Berkel, G. (2013). Vertragsmanagement. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.
• Berkel, K. (2014). Konflikttraining: Konflikte verstehen, anaylsieren, bewältigen. Hamburg: Windmühle.
• Brett, J. M. (2014). Negotiating globally: How to negotiate deals, resolve dispute, and make decisions across cultural boundaries. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Berkel, G. (2015). Global Negotiations: Professor Jeanne Brett im Gespräch mit Georg Berkel. Zeitschrift für Konfliktmanagement, 18(4), 125–126.
• Bühring-Uhle, C., Eidenmuller, H., & Nelle, A. (2009). Verhandlungsmanagement: Analyse, Werkzeuge, Strategien. Munich: C. H. Beck.
• De Cremer, D., & Pillutla, M. (2013). Making negotiations predictable: What science tells us. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Der Foo, M., Anger Elfenbein, H., Hoon Tan, H., & Chuan Aik, V. (2004). Emotional intelligence and negotiation: The tension between creating and claiming value. International Journal of Conflict Management, 15(4), 411–429.
• Diekmann, K., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Overconfident, underprepared: Why you may not be ready to negotiate. Negotiation, 9(10), 6–9.
• Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 83–87.
• Fisher, R., Ury, W. L., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in (3rd ed.). London: Penguin Books.
• Galinsky, A. D., & Mussweiler, T. (2001). First offers as anchors: The role of perspective- taking and negotiator focus. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 81(4), 657–669.
• Gigerenzer, G. (2005). I think, therefore I err. Social Research, 72(1), 195–218.
• Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Bauchentscheidungen: Die Intelligenz des Unbewussten und die Macht der Intuition. München: Goldmann.
• Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Books.
• Katz, G. (2011). Intercultural negotiations: The unique case of Germany and Israel. Berlin: Books on Demand.
• Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1986). The manager as negotiator: Bargaining for cooperation and competitive gain. New York, NY: Free Press.
• Liberman, V., Samuels, S. M., & Ross, L. (2004). The name of the game: Predictive power of reputations versus situational labels in determining prisoner’s dilemma game moves. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(9), 1175–1185.
• Lügger, K., Geiger, I., Neun, H., & Backhaus, K. (2015). When East meets West at the bargaining table: Adaptation, behavior and outcomes in intra- and intercultural German–Chinese business negotiations. Journal of Business Economics, 85(1), 15–43.
• Lytle, A. L., Brett, J. M., & Shapiro, D. L. (1999). The strategic use of interests, rights, and power to resolve disputes. Negotiation Journal, 15(1), 31–51.
• Mason, M. F., Lee, A. J., Wiley, E. A., & Ames, D. R. (2013). Precise offers are potent anchors: Conciliatory counteroffers and attributions of knowledge in negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(4), 759–763.
• Murnighan, J. K. (1991). The dynamics of bargaining games. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• O’Connor, K. M., Arnold, J. A., & Maurizio, A. M. (2010). The prospect of negotiating: Stress, cognitive appraisal, and performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(5), 729–735.
• Poitras, J., & Le Tareau, A. (2008). Dispute resolution patterns and organizational dispute states. International Journal of Conflict Management, 19(1), 72–87.
• Schneider, A. K. (2002). Shattering negotiation myths: Empirical evidence on the effectiveness of negotiation style. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 7, 143.
• Schroth, H. A. (2015). Negotiations & influence workshop. Berkeley, CA: University of California at Berkeley, Haas School of Business: Center for Executive Education UC Berkeley.
• Skyrms, B. (2001). The stag hunt. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 75(2), 31–41.
• Subramanian, G. (2010). Negotiauctions: New dealmaking strategies for a competitive marketplace. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
• Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. London: Penguin Books.
• Thibodeau, P. H., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS ONE, 6(2), e16782.
• Thompson, L. (2014). The mind and heart of the negotiator (6th ed.). London: Pearson Prentice Hall.
• Thompson, L., & Hrebec, D. (1996). Lose–lose agreements in interdependent decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 120(3), 396–409.
• Ury, W. L., Brett, J. M., & Goldberg, S. B. (1993). Getting disputes resolved: Designing systems to cut the costs of conflict. Cambridge: PON Books.
• Van Swol, L. M., Braun, M. T., & Malhotra, D. (2011). Evidence for the Pinocchio Effect: Linguistic differences between lies, deception by omissions, and truths. Discourse Processes, 49(2), 79–106.
• Weingart, L. R., Brett, J. M., Olekalns, M., & Smith, P. L. (2007). Conflicting social motives in negotiating groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 994–1010.