During the course of
negotiations, people often misrepresent information to gain at least a
temporary advantage. For example, a seller may fabricate existence of another
interested buyer or a buyer may misrepresent the price and availability of an
item from a different vendor. Reflect on deceptions in negotiations and
describe four ways to evaluate information during negotiations.
One topic that is not
discussed in Hoch (2001,) is rhetoric and its uses that I believe have a place
for discussion as to how an individual(s) with the tact of rhetoric and skill
as a negotiator utilize either to convince or deceive those who are unwary of
the tricks of the trade. Aristotelian rhetoric has been a matter of history and not
simply the philosophy of rhetoric for two millennia (Rapp, 2008, pg.2). By the very definition of rhetoric or more
importantly, the rhetorician as an individual whom is able view what is
persuasive (Rapp, 2008, pg.2).
Consequently rhetoric simply put the
ability to envision what may be persuasive in a given situation, location, or
to a group of people. So, rhetoric can have the distinct disadvantage of
serving two masters. Aristotle himself concedes that rhetoric on one hand can
be misused, as all goods except virtue. He [Aristotle] goes on to say that the
risks of misuse are outweighed by the benefits that can be accomplished, kind
of an early day risk assessment if you will (Rapp, 2008, pg.6).
As discussed in Hoch (2001,)
negotiators can be known to misrepresent themselves and their reservation
prices, intentions, interests and material facts.
As example, reservation
pricing, automobile salesmen and the age-old situation whereby the salesman is
going out on a limb with his boss to get you the pricing you two have
negotiated upon, at the salesmen’s expense. My opinion of this as conveyed to
many a salesman and merchant is simply: if you must go out on a limb or risk
getting into trouble with the boss, then you are not accomplishing your job
correctly. That generally ends the conversation and my decision to buy from
this individual.
Another example discussed in
Hoch (2001,) is interests and/or intentions whereby an individual or group
intentions and interests are misrepresented by them or a negotiator without
full disclosure. For example in Alabama a seller of a house need only disclose
defects that are structural in nature and not the fact that the house may sit
on land that is known for sinkholes. Again the intentions are to sell the
house, get it off their hands; the negotiator may or may-not disclose these
known facts because he or she wants their commission.
When we built a house South
of Birmingham years ago, we decided upon both earthquake and sinkhole
insurance… who’s to say after the fact which actually caused structural damage,
the earth quake or the subsequent sink-hole?
Material facts the final
method of evaluating information during negotiations can be described as discussed
in Hoch (2001,) lies that can constitute fraud, or, “known misrepresentation”
of the facts that eventually causes damage are unacceptable in any way, shape
or form.
In these instances the
prudent individual follows the methodology of the
40th President of the United States, Ronald Wilson Reagan. “Trust but verify”.
Relate an example of a
recent negotiation in which you have been misled and one in which you may have
overstated a claim; define how far you would be willing to go to leverage your
position.
Recently a coworker with
whom I had some preconceived trusts issues misled me. We were working on a
potentially volatile situation with some possible political ramifications that
were of a contentious nature. As suspected the individual was playing both
sides with the endgame of landing in the other court at my expense. As time
progressed I could feel the slippery slope as the situation was coming to a
head. I decided on seeking legal advice (at my own expense and incognito) and
received some very prudent advice on just how to state my position and rational,
which I did, also overstating my claim just enough to have some give or wiggle
room, all-the-while it caught my now opponent off guard and with-out a safe
place to land.
While this scenario would
not have been my first choice, it was necessary from several fronts. To
establish my ground as someone to be reckoned with and who will seek outside
and factual advice, and subsequently that I do not tolerate the antics of
slippery slopes or fence straddlers.
References
Hoch, S., Kunreuther, H.,
& Gunther, R. (2001). Wharton on Making decisionsdoi:www.wiley.com
Rapp,
Christof, "Aristotle's Rhetoric", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (winter 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2008/entries/aristotle-rhetoric
No comments:
Post a Comment