Common Problems Faced By Parties Involved In A Negotiation Process

As arrangement was portrayed already there are no questions that the need to consider another person interests and targets while in the meantime saving what's more, protecting your very own advantages and destinations infers numerous troublesome decisions concerning ways and means utilized with a specific end goal to succeed. As clarified by Cohen, transaction is a human experience that stances moral issues on the straightforward certainty that each gathering attempts to get the other party to accomplish something in its own intrigue. Besides, as there is no meaning of business on which all can concur, it is hard to agree on what are business morals and moral practices. People differ in their vision of ethical and unethical behaviors even within homogenous cultures depending on their age, experience, education level or even gender mainly because of differences in personal subjective values.

Many of the searches made in that field come to the conclusion that most of the unethical practices are linked to the nature of information that is exchanged during the process and how this information is transferred. Information is an important source of power in negotiation. To Lewicki and Robinson (1998), negotiation is primarily a process of exchanging and communicating information in a persuasive manner. Therefore, the opportunities for unethical conduct are some of a dishonest communication. In that sense, deception, bluff and lies and finally threats are tools that come naturally and logically to negotiators in order to manipulate favorably the balance of power.

1. Lying, deceiving or bluffing.
   To Lewicki (1983), the basic role of lying in arrangement is to expand the liar's control over its adversary by utilizing false or misdirecting data. Theories untruths can take numerous structures from which feigning and deluding play in vital part.
2. Undermining Dangers can be thought about

In three distinct methodologies: basic leadership, correspondence and responsibility. In the principal case, the most vital undertaking is to assess the expenses and aftereffects of the utilization of dangers with their probabilities for the two sides in the transaction. Members will then settle on the utilization and the power of dangers depending to their desires what's more, the results of utilizing it. The second methodology considers the relational connection and exceptionally the trade of contentions. Watzlawic (1976) depicts three conditions for the utilization of any risk: The risk must be sufficiently genuine, conceivable with a specific end goal to be considered by the other party. At that point it must achieve the objective, must be comprehended by the other party. At long last, the collector must have the capacity to go along.