2NG3 - Midterm Prep

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 1 person
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
Card Sorting

1/203

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Study Analytics
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced

No study sessions yet.

204 Terms

1
New cards

What is the Goal setting paradox?

Negotiators who focus on ideals do not feel as satisfied as negotiators who focus on their reservation point or BATNA

2
New cards

True or false: A positive bargaining zone is when negotiators' reservation points overlap

TRUE

3
New cards

True or false: A negative bargaining zone is when a negotiators reservation points don't overlap

TRUE

4
New cards

What is the amount of overlap between parties' reservation points is called?

Bargaining surplus

5
New cards

The positive difference between the settlement outcome and the negotiator's reservation point is called___________?

Negotiators surplus

6
New cards

True or false: Your BATNA is not static and can improve over time.

TRUE

7
New cards

True or false: Always reveal your reservation point

FALSE

8
New cards

True or false: Your aspiration, or target point, defines the upper limit on what you can get in a negotiation

TRUE

9
New cards

When negotiators make proposals that the other party considers extreme

Chilling Effect

10
New cards

promotion-focused negotiators

conceptualize goals as ideals and opportunities

11
New cards

prevention-focused negotiators

conceptualize goals as obligations and necessities

12
New cards

Occurs when the negotiations first offer is immediately accepted by the counterparty

Winners Curse

13
New cards

Makes one's first offer one's final offer

Boulwarism

14
New cards

5 Counter tactics when buyer makes the first offer:

1. Ignore the anchor

2. Counter anchor

3. Separate leverage from information (Info is what they want, leverage is why they are telling you)

4. Clarify

5. Reject the anchor

15
New cards

Predicts when and why making the first offer helps or hurts negotiators

Anchoring Information Model (AIM)

16
New cards

True or false: When both parties has good information, it is wise to make the first offer.

TRUE

17
New cards

True or false: When both parties have a lack of information, it is wise to make the first offer.

TRUE

18
New cards

True or false: When two parties have asymmetric information, it is wise to make the first offer.

FALSE

19
New cards

The first offer that falls within the bargaining zone acts as a powerful anchor point in negotiation

Anchoring Effect

20
New cards

refers to doing just enough to reach one's minimum goals.

Satisficing

21
New cards

capturing all the potential gain in a situation.

Optimizing

22
New cards

Intra-organizational

within the same organization

23
New cards

Inter-organizational

Involves two or more organizations.

24
New cards

Integrative Agreements (Win-Win)

Both negotiators optimize the potential joint gains.

25
New cards

Meaning that if parties work together, they can create more joint value than if they are purely combative

Variable sum:

26
New cards

when parties have incentives to cooperate as well as compete.

mixed-motive

27
New cards

Whatever is good for one person must ipso facto be bad for the other party. (one party's win is another party's loss)

Fixed pie (Fixed sum)

28
New cards

What is soft Bargaining?

They resign themselves to capitulating to the other side.

29
New cards

What is hard bargaining?

They prepare themselves for attack

30
New cards

A negotiator that sets the target point too high and refuses to make any concessions. (Too tough)

aspiring negotiator or positional negotiator

31
New cards

Wants what the other party does not want to give—and does not want what the other party is willing to offer.

Reactive devaluation (bias)

32
New cards

What does reservation point mean?

The absolute minimum point a negotiator sets for themselves.

33
New cards

salient numbers, figures, or values that appear to be valid but have no basis in fact.

focal point

34
New cards

Money that has been invested that is, for all practical purposes, irrecoverable.

Sunk costs

35
New cards

refers to the riskiness of the tactics that negotiators use at the bargaining table.

Strategic risk

36
New cards

refers to the risk associated with the willingness of the other party to honor its terms.

Contractual risk

37
New cards

BATNA risk

Given BATNA of equal expected value, the more risk adverse negotiator will be in a weaker bargaining position.

38
New cards

The value of an object should be about the same, whether we are a buyer or a seller.

Endowment effects

39
New cards

An important component in determining whether a person experiences regret.

Counterfactual thinking

40
New cards

Often the most important parties are not present at the negotiation table.

Hidden table

41
New cards

a transaction occurs, and no future ramifications accrue to the parties.

one-shot negotiation

42
New cards

are situations in which negotiators must renegotiate terms on some regular basis.

Repetitive negotiations

43
New cards

Money is paid for good or services.

transactional negotiations:

44
New cards

negotiations take place because a claim has been made by one party and has been rejected by the other party.

Disputes

45
New cards

In some situations, a person negotiates without any intention to reach an agreement.

False negotiations

46
New cards

refer to the fact that some negotiations affect other negotiations.

Linkage effect

47
New cards

refers to whether parties on the same side of the table are in agreement with one another concerning their interests in the negotiation. ("Of one voice")

Monolithic

48
New cards

considering how the counterparty thinks about the negotiation

Perspective-Taking

Note: it is more effective than negotiators who engage in empathy (i.e., How they feel)

49
New cards

refers to unwarranted levels of confidence in people's judgment of their abilities and the likelihood of positive events while underestimating the likelihood of negative events.

overconfidence effect

50
New cards

Determine a variety of different combinations of the issues that all achieve the target or aspiration point.

Multi-issue proposals

51
New cards

a group formed when two or more people or groups temporarily work together to achieve a common goal.

coalitions

52
New cards

Ratification

refers to whether a negotiating party must have a contract approved by some other body or group.

53
New cards

Time Horizon

the amount of time between the negotiation and the consequences or realization of negotiated agreements

54
New cards

When reservation points overlap.

The bargaining zone

55
New cards

What does ZOPA stand for?

Zone of Possible Agreement

56
New cards

Positive bargaining zone

negotiators' reservation points overlap

57
New cards

negative bargaining zone

negotiators reservation points don't overlap

58
New cards

The amount of overlap between parties' reservation points.

Bargaining surplus

59
New cards

The positive difference between the settlement outcome and the negotiator's reservation point.

negotiators surplus

60
New cards

argues that counterparties are influenced by both endpoints of the range as they evaluate the proposer's reservation price as well as how polite they believe an extreme counter-offer would be.

The tandem anchoring account

61
New cards

The reductions that a negotiator makes during the course of a negotiation.

Concessions

62
New cards

refers to the tendency of negotiators to reciprocate concessions.

Concession reciprocity

63
New cards

refers to the tendency for some negotiators to be disinclined to make concessions.

Concession aversion

64
New cards

Unilateral concessions

concessions made by one party

65
New cards

bilateral concessions

concessions made by both sides

66
New cards

premature concessions:

They make more than one concession in a row before the other party responds or counteroffers.

67
New cards

When the seller made gradual concessions, the buyer's reaction was most positive, with high satisfaction (Being tough at the beginning)

Graduated reduction in tension (GRIT) model

68
New cards

the arguments or persuasive rationale that often accompanies an offer.

Substantiation

69
New cards

critique the negotiated object or service (e.g., "It's not worth more )

disparagement rationales

70
New cards

refer to one's own limited resources (e.g., "I can't pay more ...")

- Constraint rationales

Note: Negotiators who highlight their own constraints are more successful than negotiators who argue down the value of an item.

71
New cards

also known as "blind justice", prescribes equal shares for all. Outcomes are distributed without regard to inputs, and everyone benefits (or suffers) equally.

Equality rule

72
New cards

also known as "proportionality of contributions principle", prescribes that distribution should be proportional to a person's contribution.

Equity rule

73
New cards

also known as "welfare-based allocation", states that benefits should be proportional to need.

needs-based rule

74
New cards

people pay themselves substantially more than they are willing to pay others for doing the same task

egocentric bias

75
New cards

Occurs when people believe that their interests are incompatible with the other party's interests when in fact, they are not.

False conflict (illusory conflict)

76
New cards

The belief that the counterparty's interests are directly and completely opposed to one's own interests.

The fixed-pie perception

77
New cards

Focuses on how negotiators divide resources.

Distributive negotiation

78
New cards

refers to reaching a middle ground between negotiators' positions

compromise

79
New cards

Truly integrative negotiations are ones in which all opportunities are leveraged so that no resources are left on the table.

pareto optimal:

80
New cards

is the set of outcomes corresponding to the entire set of agreements that leaves no portion of the total amount of resources unallocated.

The pareto efficient frontier

81
New cards

The strategy of trading off so as to capitalize on different strengths of preference. (making concessions on low-preference versus high-preference issues).

Logrolling

82
New cards

a personal need for structure.

Epistemic motivation

83
New cards

if you share information, the other party will often share as well.

principle of reciprocity

84
New cards

When negotiators believe they are revealing more than they actually are

The illusion of transparency

85
New cards

involves presenting the other party with at least two (and preferably more) proposals of equal value to oneself.

MESOs: Multiple Equivalent Simultaneous offers

86
New cards

occurs in advance of the parties undertaking full-scale negotiations and is designed to be replaced by a long-term agreement.

Pre-settlement settlements (PreSS)

87
New cards

Negotiators reach an initial settlement that both parties agree to, but then spend additional time attempting to improve upon

Post-settlement settlements

88
New cards

is a single salient coordinating concept, shared by negotiators

focal point

89
New cards

a departure that takes place during the course of negotiation, when the trajectory seems to change.

turning point

90
New cards

the beliefs held by people about personalities.

implicit theories

91
New cards

refers to the fact that negotiators believe they are coming on too strong, but they are not.

The line-crossing illusion

92
New cards

negotiators who desire to maximize the difference between their own and the other's outcomes, thereby "winning" or "beating" the other party.

Competitive Negotiator

93
New cards

negotiators who like to maximize joint gain and prefer to minimize differences in outcomes.

Cooperative negotiator

94
New cards

negotiators who prefer to maximize their own gain and is indifferent to how much the other person is getting.

Individualistic Negotiator or self-interested negotiator

95
New cards

refers to the negative social reaction directed at women who are seen as violating gender norms because they engage in counter-stereotypical (agentic) behaviors during negotiation.

The backlash effect

96
New cards

is a verbal or physical display of shock, disgust or disbelief made to an opening offer. (how to overcome angry negotiators?)

strategic flinch

97
New cards

refers to the ability to accept inconsistencies in behavior

Dialectical thinking

98
New cards

what is integral emotion?

related to the situation

99
New cards

What is Incidental emotion?

lacking a clear target in the situation

100
New cards

refers to the action-reaction cycle that results in genuine anger and diminishes trust in both the negotiator and counterpart.

blowback effect