The varied experiences and research carried out in the academic field and professional practice allows us to ensure that there are BEHAVIORS that arise in most of the negotiation processes that we could call Games.
We consider as a Game what is established by the well-known theory of Transactional Analysis created by Eric Bene (1910 - 1970) and which became popular through his book "Games people play" (Grove Press 1964), with a Spanish version of Editorial Diana México 1966 "Games in which we participate."
According to the AT, gambling is an implicit interactive strategy where the result is negative. In a "Game," the person appears to be performing or approving of some other person's attitude when in fact he or she does not. The negative result is usually a subtle or not so subtle humiliation or blow against the other person.
Franck Acuff and Maurice Villere tell us in a paper published in Psychology Today Sussex Pab. Inc. 1981, that a classic example of this game is called IGYSOB (I've Got you son of a bitch) and appears when, for example, one of the parties uses a minor error from the other to (how to be late) to weaken any consideration or sincerity of the opponent. In this way part A has an excuse to show its dislike to B and, incidentally, to vent hidden feelings.
A: Sorry, what time are you?
B: About a quarter past ten
A: Don't we meet at ten?
B: Yes, sorry. I had a last minute call.
A Please. Let's do what we have agreed. This is not a game, let's be serious etc. etc.
The problem with these games is that after all, nobody wins. One has for a time the feeling that he is above the other (eg making him feel foolish). But the collaborative behavior that is expected in effective negotiation is seriously threatened.
If the process began with an atmosphere of collaboration, this is quickly replaced by one of hostility. Real interests are put aside and the participants play to preserve their egos and try to tie the game.
As a consequence of this, the aforementioned authors argue, "games threaten honesty and open relationships, promote mistrust, destroy harmony and, finally, harm the achievement of objectives."
THE GAMES THE NEGOTIATORS PLAY
Negotiators must develop the ability to recognize these games of which we will cite the ten most common
1. THE EXPERT
The purpose of this game is to show that one has knowledge of the events that are affecting the negotiations. It is generally used at the beginning of the process trying to reach a position of credibility and give the impression that one has prepared properly.
2. SNOW BALL (SNOW JOB)
It is similar to the previous one and is based on trying to overwhelm the other party with data trying to achieve credibility.
A: It is clear that your proposal to increase by 30% affects the 72% of the lowest sector of workers with earnings below 9%, and 10% of employees with earnings that reach 0.67. This is a proportion that our members can hardly tolerate, especially if we consider that the entire package represents 7% less than the average real salary paid in our environment and 15% less than at the national level…
B: I really don't understand this. Please could you summarize the details?
A: I don't think it is necessary. It is obvious that these facts will even make us consider that we must increase 57%
3. SO WHAT?
This game is usually used by the parties immediately after a concession has been obtained. Without taking into account the importance of the item previously negotiated. The attitude to take is to downplay what has been gained to keep pressing on the following issues and thus continue to achieve concessions. Naturally the other party will try the opposite.
4) THE WHEAT AND THE SHELL
Perhaps this is, say the authors we cited earlier, the oldest game used in negotiation processes.
It is played including in the negotiation elements of little importance to exchange them for others of greater interest to the part that plays it.
The idea is to convey the feeling that a lot is being given and of great importance (which is not the case) in order to achieve a similar attitude from the other party and that it grants something of real importance.
5 THE WOODEN LEG
The thesis of the game is. What can you expect from a man with a wooden leg? One part begins to argue, but that it is suffering a limitation that makes it unable to take responsibility for its actions. My head hurts so much…
6. BETWEEN THE SWORD AND THE WALL
The party that introduces this game tries to establish a separation between himself and the consequences. Ostensibly, he makes a great effort of empathy and identification with the other party, but in reality they put themselves in a position of non-commitment, claiming to be trapped in a dilemma, “between the sword and wall ”.
7. APPEARING WEAKNESS
In this game, A tries to negotiate from a position of strength but exaggerating his weakness and equally exaggerating B's strength by seeking his sympathy or hoping that he will be neglected.
A can claim, for example, his lack of experience, youth, etc. Or ask B for patience and understanding The wolf who dresses as a lamb
8. I AM BORED
At times when the other party is doing his best to achieve his interests, A uses body language to express his disgust. A yawns and politely points out that he is not impressed by B's repeated arguments.
9. IF IT WERE NOT FOR YOU
By playing this game, A aims to protect himself from admitting to his own mistakes.
A: If it weren't for your closed mind, our people wouldn't be so dissatisfied.
B: It is your excessive demands that have caused them undue optimism.
A: They look great based on the low standard of living they have.
10. YES, BUT...
In this game, one of the participants in the negotiation process appears to ask the other for advice. Actually your purpose is to show that you are listening and open to the other party's suggestions. But every time the option is offered, answer Yes, but…
A: We would like to continue these conversations next week but our morning schedules are full.
B: If we try it in the afternoon? A: Unfortunately, except for Friday, we have busy afternoons
B: OK. So on Friday afternoon we can discuss all the missing items and achieve..
A: Yes, but… Do you really think that in one afternoon we will be able to see all that remains?
B: Well other times we have met at night. Maybe with one or two more nights…
A: Yes, but many times we have questioned the fact of negotiating when we are tired. Why don't we save it for next month?
DEFENSE STRATEGIES
There are some courses of action that are usually operative in the face of the games that we have mentioned.
1. BE ATTENTIVE
It is not easy many times, to realize that one is involved in a game.
The best sign is probably when you notice that the negotiation is going nowhere.
2. CULTIVATE THE OPENING
If the parties do not cooperate, each one pulls to his side and this generates a loss of time and an increase in the costs of the process.
To this is often added that interests are lost and discussions about positions become focused.
3. DO NOT PLAY
Games need at least two parts.
4. STAY AWAY FROM PRIDE
A sequence from the film "A Civil Matter", in which Robert Duvall plays the role of professor at Harvard Law School, fully illustrates this issue.
During a class, Duvall asks, What is the main mistake lawyers make? The answer: pride.
Games involve believing that "I am the strongest or the best." Remember that others also participate in the negotiation
5. AVOID THE ROLES OF VICTIM OR VICTIMARY
The perpetrator gives blows and the victim receives them. Do not assume any of these roles.
Suppose this hostile situation with a cooperative one that is usually contagious and generates better results.
LOOK TO NEGOTIATE ADDING VALUE ¡¡¡¡¡
CONCLUSION
The games that negotiators play - as defined by Transactional Analysis - are harmful to them since they hide intentions and feelings that range from prejudices to the personalization of the dispute.
They directly address honesty and the style of cooperation that should, ideally, prevail in the environment of a negotiation.
Those of us who believe that this is the best way to conduct the negotiation process, and we emphasize that it should lead to the creation of value, we understand that it is essential to know them in order to be able to counteract them or at least not fall into them leading the process to failure.
