Chapter #10 NegTech

Multiparty negotiations differ from two-party deliberations in which of the following ways?

• Multiparty negotiations have more negotiators at the table.

• More issues and more information are introduced than when two parties negotiate.

• The process for multiparty negotiators is more complex than two-party ones.

• The environment changes from a one-on-one dialogue to small group discussion.

• All of the above are true for multiparty negotiations.

One of the most fundamental consequences of increasing the number of parties in a negotiation is that

• the negotiation situation tends to become less lucid.

• the negotiation situation tends to become less complex.

• the negotiation situation tends to become less demanding.

• there will be less values, interests, and perceptions to be integrated or accommodated.

What is the result of procedural complexity in multiparty negotiations?

• The fewer the number of parties, the more complex the decision making process becomes.

• The increased number of negotiators will streamline the decision making process.

• Negotiators can ignore the problem of multiple related issues.

• Negotiators will probably have to devote discussion time to how they will manage the process to arrive at the type of solution or agreement they want.

• All of the above are the result of procedural complexity in multiparty negotiations.

In multiparty negotiations, research shows that parties who approached multiple issues simultaneously:

• achieved lower quality agreements.

• increased the likelihood of achieving agreement.

• exchanged less information.

• have less insight into the preferences and priorities of the other parties at the table.

One-on-one negotiations in full view of all group members would have all but one of the following consequences on negotiators. Which one would NOT be a consequence?

• Negotiators who have some way to control the number of parties at the table (or even in the room) may begin to act strategically.

• Since the exchanges are under surveillance negotiators will be sensitive to being observed and may feel the need to be tough.

• Negotiators can simply choose to ignore the complexity of the three or more parties and proceed strategically as a two-party negotiation.

• Negotiators can explicitly engage in coalition building as a way to marshal support.

• Negotiators will have to find satisfactory ways to explain modification of their positions

There are five ways in which the complexity increases as three or more parties simultaneously engage in negotiation. One of those listed below is not a correct statement. Which one?

• There are simply more parties involved in the negotiation.

• More parties bring more issues and positions to the table, and thus more perspectives must be presented and discussed.

• When negotiations become socially more complex, the social norms emerge that affect member participation, which reduces the stronger pressures to conform and suppress disagreement.

• As the negotiations become procedurally more complex, the parties may have to negotiate a new process that allows them to coordinate their actions more effectively.

• As the negotiations become more strategically complex, the parties must monitor the moves and actions of several other parties in determining what each will do next.

Considering the many attributes of an effective group, under which one of the following would you find a need to fully explain or define key words or language that may be part of the agreement?

• Test assumptions and inferences.

• Focus on interests, not positions.

• Disagree openly with any member of the group.

• Agree on the meaning of important words

• Keep the discussion focused.

What are the three key stages and phases that characterize multilateral negotiations? A. The prenegotiation stage, managing the actual negotiations, and managing the agreement stage.

• The coalition building stage, the relationship development stage, the networking stage.

• The coalition building stage, the networking stage, and the actual negotiation stage.

• The prenegotiation stage, the networking stage, and the managing the agreement stage.

• . None of the above lists the three key stages and phases that characterize multilateral negotiations.

• The prenegotiation stage, managing the actual negotiations, and managing the agreement stage.

Many complex international negotiations devote a great deal of time to the question of just who will be recognized and who can speak for others. The issue about participants can be decided by asking which of the following questions?

• Whose presence is likely to help other parties achieve their objectives?

• Whose presence is likely to keep other parties from achieving their objectives?

• Who could spoil the deal if they were excluded?

• All of the above questions can help decide who to recognize.

• None of the above questions will help determine inclusion/exclusion.

The prenegotiation phase of multilateral negotiations

• is when the parties are employing decision rules and criteria.

• manages the group process and outcome.

• is when the chair is appointed.

• is characterized by lots of informal contact among the parties.

• All of the above characterize the prenegotiation phase of multilateral negotiation.