Trust and Relationships in Negotiation Essay

Trust and Relationships in Negotiation

Introduction

Successful negotiations rely heavily upon the ability of those involved to develop trust and build solid relationships. If parties to a negotiation cannot trust one another and do not develop the kind of relationships required, it is highly unlikely that they will arrive at the kind of satisfactory, win-win outcome that all sides desire. But how does one define trust? What steps can be taken to best support a working relationship? How can one tell if one is moving towards a successful negotiation or working against one’s own best interests? This paper will review the topic of trust and relationship development in negotiations to show how one can approach the problem of trust and relationship building while working on negotiating an outcome that satisfies all parties.

What is Trust?

Trust is a concept that has different meanings depending on how one thinks of its application in negotiation. For instance, Ross and LaCroix (1996) show that trust can refer to a personality trait that a negotiator might have—i.e., is the negotiator trusting of other others or does he demonstrate a lack of willingness to trust those on the other side? Trust can also refer to a spirit of cooperation or to one’s motivational orientation—i.e., whether one is motivated to show trust in the other party or whether one is skeptical of the party’s words and deeds. Additionally, trust can be seen as a pattern of predictable behavior or as an orientation towards problem-solving (Ross & LaCroix, 1996). If one’s actions and words are consistent and one is focused on overcoming obstacles and working towards a solution, one will be seen as more worthy of trust than a negotiator who remains aloof and inconsistent throughout the process. Thus, trust can represent a wide gamut of attitudes, orientations and orientations—but in the end it is ultimately a barometer of the extent to which the party to the negotiation is working in good faith towards a positive outcome for all. As Ross and LaCroix (1996) note, trust is about loyalty to one’s constituents, partners in negotiation, and process.

Trust can be achieved through the demonstration of transparency and through the commitment of oneself to the process of negotiation. Defining one’s objectives and what one is willing to do to come to a solution is part of that process.

Building Relationships through Trust

Trust is an essential element in the building of relationships. A negotiation is a process, and if one or more parties are engaged in a kind of opportunism without respect to the needs of others or to transparency in the process (Shell, 1991). Relationship building has to be thought of in terms that go beyond the negotiation table. For example, as Shell (1991) points out, the expectations that one party to a negotiation may have of another will determine the extent to which the other party will act. If one party fails to live up to those expectations, it can have a detrimental effect on the relationship between the two parties going forward and can impact future negotiations. One side may develop a bad reputation and be viewed by others as a bad faith negotiator. If one party does not uphold its end of a bargain, the relationship between parties can sour. Unfortunately, this happens all too often in negotiations and parties that do not follow through on promises are at fault. It is all too common, for example, that “having received its benefit from the bargain, the party who is to perform last may be tempted to renege on its obligations” (p. 221). Avoiding that temptation is part of being a respectable and respectful negotiator. It is part of what it means to be trustworthy and to engage in relationship building. Those who succumb to that vile temptation may frustrate whatever good will has been established between parties and undermine the potentiality of future negotiations.

A recent example of the…

Some parts of this document are missing

Click here to view full document

…more is required. Negotiators have to show that they are not going to destroy the other side or attempt to destroy the other side if they do not get their way. That is indicative of a side that is attempting to use force and threats to achieve a one-sided victory. Negotiations are about compromise—not threats. Successful negotiators seek to build long-term relationships through understanding and the implementation of mutually beneficent aims. The more agreeable a plan is to both sides, the more likely it is to be implemented. The nature of the relationship between China and Russia is one such example of how mutual dependence can be a positive factor in relationship building.

To turn a sour relationship into a positive relationship, therefore, it is important to identify how the sides are mutually dependent and use that source of information as the starting point for a new relationship. However, it is but a foundation and the bricks and mortar that will go into building up the walls and roof of that relationship will consist of trust and the follow-through that goes into showing one side or the other that the negotiated deal will be upheld.

Conclusion

Negotiation is a process that requires trust and relationship building in order to be successful. When one side or more fails to demonstrate trust or fails to focus on relationship-building, it undermines its own potential to have a successful negotiation. Trust is a concept that refers to commitment, transparency, good faith, and a willingness to sincerely negotiate a compromise. If one’s orientation is not focused on arriving at a win-win outcome, one will not be seen as trustworthy. If one is not seen as trustworthy, one will not be seen as a good partner in negotiation. One will not be seen as a good partner for developing a working relationship that can last into the future. A relationship that does not extend beyond the negotiation table is not one that will support follow-through. Unless one is…