PIBBS

Negotiating Deals and Settling Conflict Benefit Both Sides PIBBS
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, right, meets with Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif early in negotiations over Iran's nuclear program.

Negotiating Deals and Settling Conflict Benefit Both Sides

April 3, 2015 1927

Kerry and Zarif meet on Iran's nuclear program

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, right, meets with Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif early in negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.

It has happened repeatedly throughout history: two or more countries or ethnic groups fundamentally disagree and war breaks out.

Or a marriage ends and the emotional and financial toll drags on for years.  And then there are the hostile corporate takeovers, which not only reduce shareholder wealth but stir bad feelings all around.

As new research in Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences points out, dispute settlement does not have to proceed and end badly.

In fact, decades of research in social psychology has shown that by regulating conflict constructively parties can not only avoid unpleasant and costly conflicts but settle disputes in ways that mutually benefit both sides, certainly the hope of all sides in the current breakthrough over a Iranian nuclear deal.

PIBBS cover

The Federation of Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, or FABBS, with SAGE, the parent of Social Science Space, publishes the journal Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences. This annual journal features research findings in the sciences of mind, brain, and behavior that are applicable to nearly every area of public policy. The first issue comprises 33 articles in social and personality psychology focused on topics including health, education, justice, the environment, and inequality.

This constructive strategy—known as negotiation, or problem solving—cannot be unilateral, and it is the only form of dispute resolution that not only creates value but also benefits both sides.

Personality and Negotiation

Sometimes negotiation arises when one side realizes it can’t win, explains Carsten K.W. De Dreu, author of “Negotiating Deals and Settling Conflict Can Create Value for Both Sides.”

Negotiation prevailed when the Irish Republican Army and British government negotiated an end to decades of bloodshed and terrorist attacks in Northern Ireland.

Or it may arise to avoid catastrophe, such as when the United States and what was then the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics launched intensified trade negotiations to end severe drought in the USSR.

Negotiation is not easy, De Dreu states. “There is room for cheating and deception, and thus for suspicion and distrust.”

Adding to the challenge is the mentally taxing nature of negotiation.  People often try to simplify the issues by making assumptions and setting limits on what they might consider a gain or loss.  De Dreu uses the term naïve realism to describe negotiators who fail to recognize other points of view and frame questions that could support only their own hypotheses.

Greed and other barriers to negotiation can be counteracted by a concept he calls cooperative motivation: the desire to reach an agreement that also accommodates the other side.  People with personality traits that are heavy on “agreeableness” and “need for affiliation” typically are more inclined to make concessions to benefit the other side.

Low-Pressure Situations

Showing concern for the other party does not necessarily require ignoring self-interest, De Dreu states. But it does require putting in the time to fully understand the issues.

In short, there are no short cuts. As De Dreu explains, negotiators need to fully understand the issues as well as the other party’s needs and interests. They also should be free to negotiate without the weight of “constituents”—colleagues, spouses, friends, etc.—looking over their shoulder. Negotiators often will assume these constituents want them to be competitive.

As the paper states: “Value creation benefits from benign environments.”

In low-pressure situations, negotiators are free to focus on long-term perspectives and match their own interests with those of the other party. In the end, both sides make concessions, but both sides also win.


Jennifer Anderson is a professional journalist specializing in health and science. She can be reached at jennifer_anderson@verizon.net

View all posts by Jennifer Anderson

Related Articles

Analyzing the Impact: Social Media and Mental Health 
Research
May 15, 2024

Analyzing the Impact: Social Media and Mental Health 

Read Now
New Fellowship for Community-Led Development Research of Latin America and the Caribbean Now Open
Academic Funding
May 14, 2024

New Fellowship for Community-Led Development Research of Latin America and the Caribbean Now Open

Read Now
New Opportunity to Support Government Evaluation of Public Participation and Community Engagement Now Open
Featured
April 22, 2024

New Opportunity to Support Government Evaluation of Public Participation and Community Engagement Now Open

Read Now
Three Decades of Rural Health Research and a Bumper Crop of Insights from South Africa
Impact
March 27, 2024

Three Decades of Rural Health Research and a Bumper Crop of Insights from South Africa

Read Now
Using Translational Research as a Model for Long-Term Impact

Using Translational Research as a Model for Long-Term Impact

Drawing on the findings of a workshop on making translational research design principles the norm for European research, Gabi Lombardo, Jonathan Deer, Anne-Charlotte Fauvel, Vicky Gardner and Lan Murdock discuss the characteristics of translational research, ways of supporting cross disciplinary collaboration, and the challenges and opportunities of adopting translational principles in the social sciences and humanities.

Read Now
Coping with Institutional Complexity and Voids: An Organization Design Perspective for Transnational Interorganizational Projects

Coping with Institutional Complexity and Voids: An Organization Design Perspective for Transnational Interorganizational Projects

Institutional complexity occurs when the structures, interests, and activities of separate but collaborating organizations—often across national and cultural boundaries—are not well aligned. Institutional voids in this context are gaps in function or capability, including skills gaps, lack of an effective regulatory regime, and weak contract-enforcing mechanisms.

Read Now
The Importance of Using Proper Research Citations to Encourage Trustworthy News Reporting

The Importance of Using Proper Research Citations to Encourage Trustworthy News Reporting

Based on a study of how research is cited in national and local media sources, Andy Tattersall shows how research is often poorly represented in the media and suggests better community standards around linking to original research could improve trust in mainstream media.

Read Now
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments