In many negotiations, both parties are aware of what their interests are, and they are willing to engage in a give-and-take process with the other party to come to agreement. In conflicts related to personal identity and deeply-held beliefs or values, however, negotiation dynamics can become more complex. Parties may not be willing to make any concession that helps the other side, even if it would provoke a reciprocal concession in their favor. In such conflict negotiation cases, alternative dispute resolution tactics may be required.
In values-based disputes, there are steps negotiators can take to help move contentious negotiations move forward in a constructive manner.
Resolving Values-Based Disputes
Here are four conflict negotiation strategies for resolving values-based disputes:
-
- Consider interests and values separately: Begin by trying to separate the values- or identity-based elements of a dispute from more traditional interest-based components, then address the interest-based portion of the dispute in the usual way. Doing so could make it possible for the parties to confront the values-based portion of their disagreement at a later time.
- Engage in relationship-building dialogue: Instead of seeking to resolve a values-based dispute, aim for a different goal: moving beyond demonization toward mutual understanding and respect through dialogue. In particular, you can pursue cognitive understanding in such dialogue-centered negotiations. The goal of cognitive understanding is for all parties involved to reach an accurate conceptualization of one another’s point of view. This type of understanding doesn’t require sympathy or emotional connection, only a “values-neutral” observation that enables negotiators to describe accurately what someone else believes about the situation, write Robert Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet, and Andrew S. Tulumello in Beyond Winning: Negotiating to Create Values in Deals and Disputes (Harvard University Press, 2000). In particular, negotiators can gain understanding of each other through a method called looping, in which parties have a chance to explain themselves and each repeat back the other person’s point of view.
- Appeal to overarching values: You may be able to reframe your values-based dispute by appealing to other values that you and your counterpart share, including universal beliefs such as equal rights or non-violence, rather than focusing on the differences in beliefs that precipitated the dispute. Recognizing common values can open lines of communication, build trust, and otherwise improve relations. It might also be a springboard to inventing ways of working together more effectively in the future. This approach to seeking settlement sidesteps the value differences that triggered the dispute.
- Confront value differences directly: Finally, you might try to confront your value differences in a carefully controlled fashion by exploring and questioning each other’s values with the goal of possibly altering beliefs. While we tend to resist the notion that anyone ever alters his fundamental beliefs, the fact is, such conversions take place all the time. In the end, at least one of the parties might change their beliefs or self-perceptions.
Even in cases where resolution of a dispute is not possible, these four approaches will allow for greater understanding between parties, and clarify where the differences of identity and values lie. In many cases, however, following these steps will help ensure that a values-based dispute can be negotiated successfully.
Why Conflict Negotiation Works
In the realm of global politics, there have been numerous occasions when groups with diametrically opposed values and identities have, through the therapeutic effects of truth-telling, cast aside generations of hatred and mistrust and transitioned into the long, slow process of reconciliation. When we think about the divided societies that have managed to build a workable peace after decades or even generations of bloodshed, such as South Africa and Ireland, we ought to be encouraged.
Empathic understanding goes deeper than the cognitive understanding described above, as it aims to enhance trust, reduce defensiveness, and potentially change relationships for the better. The point of empathetic understanding is not to transform parties’ identities or values, but rather to help them engage with each others’ beliefs and move past stereotypes. Ideally, they will be able to overcome misconceptions and find a path to cooperation.
Negotiators caught up in values-based disputes need not aim for settlement in the traditional sense. Increasing our respect for views contrary to our own and learning to live with fundamental differences in values and beliefs are themselves laudable goals. When we engage in values-based dialogue, we may not resolve our disagreements, yet we can strive to learn more about one another so that we can more easily live side by side.
Which conflict negotiation solutions have worked for you in the past? Let us know in the Comments.
Related Article: Dealmaking: Relationship Rules for Dealmakers
Adapted from “How to Negotiate When Values Are at Stake” by Lawrence Susskind (Ford Professor of Urban and Environmental Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology), published in the Negotiation newsletter.
How much is the course?
You can find pricing https://www.pon.harvard.edu/category/courses-and-training/3-day/
I wants daily news on negotiation and leadership events.
Hi
Please sign up for our email newsletters on our site to receive our email newsletters.
The problem of with value based disputes is they quickly become a zero sum game. What you give up the other receives. Easily measured and the resulting win lose outcome is unpalatable. My strategy in relation to this sort of problem is 1. there must be an over riding intention to continue or develop a working relationship between the parties. 2. That all financial issue are connected to technical matters. I park the discussion on cost and focus on finding the best engineering/ technical solution. 3. Once you have the best solution you can consider the implication of costs. These discussion will identify options and provide the basis of commercial discussions. steps are: Relationship-rapport-options- commercial discussions.
Excellent post. I used to be checking continuously this blog and I’m impressed! Very useful info specially the ultimate phase 🙂 I handle such info much. I was seeking this certain information for a very lengthy time. Thank you and best of luck.