Negotiating Differences and Conflict: Time for a New Attitude

“You get what you negotiate” - (Unknown)

“A negotiator should observe everything. You must be part Sherlock Holmes, part Sigmund Freud." - (Victor Kiam)

The recent surprise results in the May 2024 South African elections which saw the ANC lose

its parliamentary majority, creating the necessity of a government of national unity (GNU) in which it would, for the first time since 1994, have to share power with other parties has brought into focus, once again, the very essential skill of negotiation which affects all aspects of our lives.

It is also worth remembering that the negotiated settlement reached at Codesa pre the 1994 elections is still highly regarded world-wide as one of the most successful national conflict negotiation processes to date. Only time will tell if the successes of the negotiations behind the first democratic elections will be repeated to the same effect. It is therefore an opportune moment to revisit some of the important aspects of this necessary skill of negotiation to peace and harmony in our business and personal lives. Underpinning any discussion on negotiation is the concept of difference and it’s one that many people (in my professional experience) battle with.

The issue is simply this- we are all different and diverse (in terms of DNA, religion, race, gender, language, culture and a multitude of other dimensions) and therefore we need in our daily interactions to expect and anticipate this. In reality, however, the opposite occurs- we expect other people to think, feel and behave like us, which is quite egocentric to say the least. When we try to enforce our “reality” on to others, be they the diverse groupings referred to above or whoever, conflict in its various forms invariably ensues. This phenomenon is aggravated by the stereotypes that we all have about other people/negotiating partners e.g. “all Portuguese speaking people are..” etc.

This is not a desirable outcome and therefore we need, from the outset, to work from the basic principle of “expect difference and work toward consensus” rather than the other way

around.

Underlying all conflicts is the attitude or negotiating philosophies with which they are approached. These are commonly known as the following: win-lose; lose- lose or the ideal: win-win.

These attitudes ultimately have a big role to play in the resulting outcome. The win-lose attitude is common in business partnerships or marriages where there has been a break-down in trust and the associated strong emotions of resentment, hurt and conflict which inevitably follow. There is a tendency to exact revenge in some form of payback which very often leads to a lose-lose on both sides.

Thus if one party “wins” , the other “losing” party will make damn sure that the “winner” loses, at least in the long run. This clearly is not the way to go. It takes a good negotiator(s) to realise this and work toward the only sustainable long term solution ie a win-win agreement which satisfies both(or more) parties.

Controlling conflict is essential to successful negotiation. As per the 1994 SA elections, negotiators had to address needs and not wants in order to achieve a successful outcome, focusing on the issues at hand rather than the personalities. So, paradoxically, we negotiate differences not by focussing on them but rather by identifying shared needs- we then begin to negotiate sameness which will limit the potential for conflict to bubble over into overt hostility.

If one allows the negotiation process to be based on differences, this can lead to position bargaining and the deadlocks that we have seen in certain municipalities in the Gauteng area i.e. Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni.

This conflict management style unfortunately also occurs a lot in management and union negotiations in South Africa. It is destructive and we have seen the results in terms of a breakdown of services/service delivery in the above two municipalities. In the case of unions and management it leads to deadlocks and strikes which invariably lead lost salaries in the case of workers, lost revenue in the case of companies and a reduced GDP for the country as a whole.

Another important aspect of negotiating style is self- control and remaining positive, which contributes to a calming effect on proceedings. Listening to the opposite parties demands first, before reacting is another key recommendation.

Should conflict arise, however, is needs to be addressed immediately. Issues can be “parked” for a while in order to be readdressed later on in the process. If the issue has gone too far to be parked, then a “time-out” can be called for both or all parties involved so that all may reconsider their positions. In my experience a time-out is as useful for

adults as it is for children.

Concerning negotiation tactics, there are as many of these as there are negotiation textbooks and authors.

Some of these can be mentioned here:

• the 50/50 split and split the difference

• the “nibble” (freebies)

• escalation (introducing a new issue or reopening a

settled issue)

• frequent caucusing

• good cop, bad cop (an old favourite)

• the “what if” scenarios

• limited authority/mandates

• ultimatums

• patience (slowing down the process)

A Question sometimes asked is what makes a good negotiator? From my perspective as someone who considers himself a professional audience. The most important aspect would be the ability to listen.

Other characteristics would be:

• confidence

• good communication skills

• good strategy

• flexibility

• understanding of human behaviour

• decisiveness

• patience

Among the characteristics associated with the bad negotiator would be:

• fear of conflict

• fear of failure

• a need to be liked

• a need to talk.

The subject of ethics in negotiations also needs to be raised; sometimes the “need to win” can trump people’s sense of values and morality. The fact is that the negotiation process can often deliver moral dilemmas.

The bottom line in such cases is the two reliable points of reference often referred to in such a case i.e. the first is your own set of religious and moral beliefs; the second is the legal system, ie the Companies Act and other legal prescriptions for good Corporate Governance and behaviour. If you become aware of unethical behaviour in you negotiating partners behaviour then you need to call this out and if not resolved, decide whether you wish to continue negotiating with such a partner or not.

Finally, the success in negotiations relies on good preparation and research into what you negotiating partner wants and values- the old adage applies: “If you fail to plan you plan to fail”

.

“The most difficult thing in any negotiation, almost, is making sure that you strip it of the emotion and deal with the facts.” - (Howard Baker)

Acknowledgements:

Lewis, Dennis T. Negotiating in the 21st Century : Zebra Press