Term
|
Definition
a process involving two or more people/groups where:
1. the parties have a degree of difference in positions, interests, goals, values or beliefs, and
2. the parties strive to reach agreement on issues or course of action. |
|
|
Term
| Interest-Based Negotiations (IBN) |
|
Definition
| Also referred to as Interest-based Problem-Solving, IBN is the practice of focusing on the interests, and not the positions of the two negotiating parties. It is the preferred style by the Air Force mediators because, in most instances, there will be a continuing relationship between the parties after mediation, and negotiations adjourn. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An interest is the reason behind your position. It is the ―why‖ behind what you want. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| those concerning how a process is conducted. Negotiators with procedural interests are not as concerned with the actual details of the outcome as they are with how an outcome is determined. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| (sometimes called relationship interests) are concerned with how people feel, how they are perceived, and how they relate with others. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| which are perhaps the most important, have to do with things such as schedules, prices, salaries, etc. These make up the bulk of most negotiations. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Defined as ―an offer that is at (or slightly more aggressive) than the aspiration point.‖ |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The best each party hopes to get out of a negotiated agreement |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| ‗bottom line‘; the least favorable option or offer you will accept. |
|
|
Term
| Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA): |
|
Definition
| Defined as ―an alternative that, should negotiations fail, you are willing and able to execute without the other party‘s participation or permission.‖ |
|
|
Term
| Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA): |
|
Definition
| The “bargaining range‖ defined as the overlapping (common) area of each party‘s aspiration point and reservation point. No overlap, no ZOPA! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A demand is a statement of terms with no room for adjustment. It is positional and embodies the most precise use of a ―take it or leave it‖ option. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| mental processes tend to be creative and spontaneous. They are comfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| tend to be reliable, rational, and principle-based. They constantly work to reduce uncertainty and ambiguity. |
|
|
Term
| TRUST INFORMATION POWER AND OPTIONS (TIPO) MODEL |
|
Definition
| When used correctly, the TIPO model can help you negotiate effectively with subordinates, supervisors, or anyone whose positions, interests, goals, values, and beliefs differ from yours. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| “Your belief and/or evidence that the opposite’s interactions with you are or will be genuine, sincere, and honest.‖ |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Personal trust stands alone. It is not reliant on any institution or third party. At the most basic level, personal trust is established between two people (i.e., supervisor and subordinate). |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Process trust exists when both parties have faith in a governing institution and believe that it supports their negotiations. You trust that these processes promote outcomes that are justified (fair and impartial), legal, ethically acceptable, and also satisfy the interests of both parties. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The level of trust directly influences the amount of information shared between/among negotiating parties. When we trust our opposite, we believe the information they present is truthful and accurate. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| We have personal and position powers that enable us to accomplish various actions. Determining our opposite‘s powers helps us decide whether we should use ―power over‖ or ―power with‖ during negotiations |
|
|
Term
| Coercive and Reward Power |
|
Definition
| These powers depend on one‘s belief that his or her opposite is willing and able to inflict punishment and/or offer incentives. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This power pertains to who you know or are affiliated with. This power depends on the other‘s belief you have powerful connections with others who can support and strengthen your position. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is based on one‘s rank, position, or level of authority. Although you may be able to use this "Power Over" your opposite, |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| (or Charisma): People respond to this power because they have a high identification with you, respect and admire you, or tend to follow and agree with you because they aspire to be like you. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This power comes from one‘s knowledge, use, and sharing of data or information that others may need or desire. Access to secure data systems, leadership meetings, briefings, even gossip, increases your information power base. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This power comes from one‘s expertise in a specific task, subject, or career field. Subject-matter experts are valuable members of any organization. How you use and share this power base can improve or reduce trust and ultimately the outcome of your negotiations. |
|
|
Term
| When seeking options, there are two important steps that must be accomplished first: |
|
Definition
1. Define the problem, situation, or dispute
2. Identify the required and available resources (information, power, time, people, money, etc.) needed to solve the problem, improve the situation, or settle the dispute. More resources usually lead to more options. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This approach centers on the who relationship that exists between individuals or groups involved. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Depending on the stakes and situation, this approach places more importance on reaching an outcome, solution, or resolution. In the military context, it is getting the mission done. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Use this passive, unassertive, strategy to maintain the current situation. It is useful when:
1. the current situation favors any proposed solution;
2. the issue at hand is unimportant to one or both parties;
3. there are other, more pressing priorities;
4. the opposite is way too powerful or competitive. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Use this passive strategy when preserving the relationship between you and the other party is more important than the task. Under this strategy one party complies with or gives in so
the opposite (more assertive party) gets what they want. Use of this strategy tends to delegate responsibility to the other person or party. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Use this assertive, winner-takes-all, task oriented strategy when obtaining your objective is paramount, regardless of the cost to the opposite‘s interests or to the relationship. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Use this ―compromising‖ strategy when there is little chance of getting everything you want but a solution is needed. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The strategy, known as the Cooperative Negotiation Strategy (CNS) depends heavily on each party‘s collaborative efforts and desire to achieve a mutually satisfactory outcome (task orientation) while simultaneously managing a trusting relationship (people orientation). |
|
|
Term
| Key Features of the Cooperative Negotiation Strategy (CNS): |
|
Definition
1. CNS Changes Negotiation from a Contest of Wills to a Search for Solutions
2. CNS not only Focuses on the Problem but also Actively Manages the Relationship:
3. CNS Focuses on Understanding the Underlying Interests
4. CNS Recognizes that Information Sharing and Critical Thinking Are at the Heart of Problem solving |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Mediation is an alternative form of dispute resolution where parties turn to (rely on) a neutral third party who uses interest-based problem-solving techniques to assist in resolving their dispute. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Evaluative style of mediation, a subject-matter expert mediator describes the issue, offers an opinion on the strengths and weaknesses of each party‘s side, and suggests options to resolve the matter. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An active third party (mediator) who enhances communication and encourages the parties to discuss matters freely and voluntarily participate in the mediation process. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Stakeholders are other outside parties who have a vested or personal interest in the initiation, processing, and resolution of an existing dispute. Commanders, first sergeants, supervisors, subordinates, neighbors, family members, as well as legal and other intra-agency representatives (i.e., labor unions) are all potential stakeholders of mediation. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A caucus is confidential and private meeting between each of the parties (individually) and the mediator. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A mediator facilitates communications, promotes understanding, and focuses negotiating parties on their interests (rather than their positions), |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This occurs when there is the failure to make progress toward resolution |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is a process where the mediator gets the parties to understand, typically through a series of questions, the weaknesses of their case, issue, or demand. |
|
|
Term
| Fostering Understanding of Others’ Views |
|
Definition
| One of the strongest barriers encountered in negotiation and mediation is the inability or unwillingness of the parties to ―see‖ the problem from their opponent‘s point of view. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| For the mediator, it is very important to have no outward reaction to a party‘s emotional display. A reaction can jeopardize the mediator‘s all-important neutrality and credibility. |
|
|
