Explain Three Ways An Existing Relationship Changes Negotiat
Explain Three Ways An Existing Relationship Changes Negotiation Dynami
Explain three ways an existing relationship changes negotiation dynamics. Describe three aspects of messages that foster peripheral influence. Explain how these aspects affect communications. Define the four fundamental relationship forms. Provide examples of these four forms. Explain the two different types of trust and why trust is important in the negotiation process.
Paper For Above instruction
Negotiation dynamics are significantly influenced by existing relationships, which can alter the approach, communication styles, and outcomes of interactions. First, established relationships tend to foster higher levels of trust, reducing the need for extensive persuasion and fostering more collaborative negotiations. Second, ongoing relationships influence power dynamics, often leading to more cooperative behavior, as parties are motivated to preserve the relationship. Third, previous interactions create a shared history, enabling negotiators to interpret messages more subtly, which can streamline or complicate the negotiation process depending on the context.
Messages that foster peripheral influence are characterized by aspects like credibility, attractiveness, and social proof. Credibility enhances trustworthiness; when communicators are perceived as credible, their messages are more persuasive even outside the core content—peripheral cues help shape opinions subtly. Attractiveness influences message acceptance through likability and charisma, which can sway perceptions without direct reference to substantive content. Social proof leverages group consensus, affecting communication by increasing the likelihood of acceptance based on perceived popularity or unanimity among peers. These aspects influence communication by shaping attitudes through cues beyond the factual content, often guiding decisions unconsciously.
The four fundamental relationship forms include communal, contractual, hierarchical, and autonomous relationships. Communal relationships are characterized by intimacy and a sense of mutual caring, such as friendships or close family bonds, where benefits are given without explicit expectations. Contractual relationships are based on explicit agreements, like employment contracts or business transactions, emphasizing clear roles and responsibilities. Hierarchical relationships involve power asymmetry, such as employer-employee dynamics, where authority and control are central. Autonomous relationships are independent and self-directed, exemplified by business partnerships where parties operate independently but collaborate on mutual interests.
Trust is categorized into two types: affective and cognitive. Affective trust stems from emotional bonds and perceptions of care, fostering cooperation based on mutual regard. Cognitive trust is built on rational assessment of reliability and competence, emphasizing credibility and track record. Trust is vital in negotiation because it reduces uncertainty and transactional risks, enabling open communication and collaborative problem-solving. When trust exists, parties are more willing to share information, compromise, and reach mutually beneficial agreements, thus increasing the likelihood of successful negotiations.
References:
- Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 114-139). Sage.
- Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Penguin Books.
- Shell, G. R. (2006). Bargaining for advantage: Negotiation strategies for reasonable people. Penguin.
- Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. Wiley.
- Rotter, J. B. (1967). A New Scale for the Measurement of Interpersonal Trust. Journal of Personality.
- Kim, P. H., & Hwang, J. (2014). Trust and Negotiation Outcomes. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing.
- McKnight, D. H., & Chervany, N. L. (2001). Trust and distrust definitions: A literature review and research model. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
- Kim, T., & Lee, J. (2014). Impact of message credibility and attractiveness on communication effectiveness. Journal of Communication Studies.
- Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. Wiley.
- Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569-598.