Intercultural Management Persuasion Tactics Are Popular Strategies

Intercultural Management

Persuasion tactics are popular strategies applied in dispute management and decision-making in international negotiations. Persuasion is the core center of various alternative dispute resolution approaches. Persuasion is the only way for people to refine an international negotiation that is not working according to their expectations. Since persuasion is, the most popular tactic used to solve conflicts in international negotiations. Therefore, it is necessary for all negotiators to be familiar with negotiation skills and dynamics. However, some persuasion tactics used in international negotiations have shown to be undesirable and would not elicit productive and efficient results (Michaelowam, 2011).

Negative effect in international negotiation: even before the beginning of any negotiation, people in a negative mood lack the desired confidence. They become unable to use cooperative strategies. In the process of negotiating, negotiators who are in a negative mood will not enjoy the interaction; they will demonstrate minimal contentious behavior, use extremely aggressive tactics, and less cooperative approaches. In turn, this reduces the chances of attaining instrumental goals set by the parties and lowers the chances of finding integrative gains (Albin, 2001). Obviously, compared with negotiators who show positive affectivity, negotiators with negative affectivity are likely to reach fewer agreements and will show restraint honor towards those agreements. Unfavorable outcomes arise due to poor decision-making procedure like lack of creativity in persuasion, lack of respect for other people's views, unwillingness to embrace risks and lack of confidence. Post negotiation negative affect has positive benefits, too. For instance, it increases the level of satisfaction among actors, which results in a high desire for future interactions. Subsequent interactions are triggered by affective commitment, which sets the stage for this achievement (Michaelowam, 2011).

People who are involved in any international negotiation must have the freedom to make decisions. Lack of authority for the participants to make decisions will lead to poor outcomes. If the participants lack a recognized and legitimate right to decision making, they will be limited to exchange of information during negotiations (Michaelowam, 2011).

Lack of willingness to compromise: some negotiations need compromise. Lack of compromise among the negotiators might result to an agreement that does not meet the needs of all the participants. Nevertheless, lack of compromise to focus on each party's interests might not lead to a satisfactory conclusion for every party. In cases where assets are physically divided, principles or values preclude compromise hence negotiations become impossible (Albin, 2001).

A sense of deadline and urgency: negotiations take place in the context of urgency or pressure to reach a decision. Absence of internal or external time constrain shapes the outcome of a negation. External pressures include administrative decisions, court dates, predictable changes, and executive decisions in the negotiation climate. Internal constraints include negotiators establishing an artificial deadline to motivate another party to compromise. When participants do not feel a sense of urgency during negotiations, it makes negotiations unsuccessful. If procrastination is disadvantageous to one party, then it means that negotiations will not take place (Albin, 2001).