Psychological Concepts And Tools From Negotiation - Research Paper Example

Psychological Concepts And Tools From Negotiation, Mediation And Psychotherapy Negotiation is very essential when there is a need for combined effort in achieving any goal. Negotiation occurs at different interpersonal levels. The way people negotiate at all these levels depends on the magnitude of the topic under negotiation, the time available as well as the number of participating parties. Some of the most effective levels of negotiation entail intrapersonal level, group level, interpersonal level, organizational level, and virtual level. The research on how negotiation works were initiated in the 1960s by social psychologists. From that time, researchers from many academic and professional disciplines have conducted various researches. Introduction For many years, negotiations have been the only mean of solving long time conflicts and disagreements between different parties. There are several perspectives that have been identified and expounded to underline how negotiation can produce the best outcome in the healing process. Additionally, researchers from various fields have researched on the concept of negotiation and its role in reconciliation and favorable coexistence between different conflicting groups and entities. Nevertheless, negotiations have been influenced by several components that either make the negotiation process successful or complicate the entire process. It is clear that many conflicts, especially those which take a long period of time, are solved through a well-structured negotiation process (Leigh, Jiunwen and Brian, 2009). The paper will focus on the psychological analysis of conflict, the most appropriate perspective in solving conflicts and an explanation of the importance of negotiation in the conflict solving process. Psychological Analysis Psychological Dynamics of Conflict Conflict is a very common phenomenon in human interaction. People conflict on either an individual or a group level. Conflicts come because of the difference in interest on the goal and perception. From a psychological perspective on conflict analysis, the emergence of a conflict is because of individual perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and motivation. For the resolution to occur in such cases, playing members need to compromise some of their perception, beliefs, and attitudes. In most situations, conflicts are cultivated by the generation of conflictive ethos among group members, which lead to dominant orientation. The reconciliation process is, therefore, very important as it determines the success of peaceful relationship after reconciliation among the conflicting parties. Conflicting situations are always painful, stressful and costly in terms of resources and humanitarian experiences. Therefore, there is the need for the development of psychological infrastructure to facilitate the group members with the capability of adapting to the conflicting situations, to survive the stressful situations as well as creating the modalities for living successfully with enemies (Leigh, Jiunwen, and Brian, 2009). Psychological Dynamic of Resolution Resolution is only practical in the groups that have been in coexistence for a long time and have involved themselves in the frequent conflict in their lifetime. In such groups, the members engage in cognitive activity in order to understand the situations that led to the emergence of conflict. To start with, they try to understand the situation by getting the answers as to why the conflict erupted, who was responsible and getting an understanding of the aim of the conflicting parties. The group members constitute beliefs, which will be the guiding principle towards solving the problem. This helps in creating a productive picture of the conflict among the group members. The involvement of the group members in solving the problem depends on the magnitude and longevity of the conflict. Group members involve themselves more in the cognitive effort of solving the problem in the case where the intergroup conflict has taken a long time to resolve and has the magnificent effect on the group cohesiveness (Leigh, Jiunwen and Brian, 2009). Additionally, to ensure a solution to the conflict in any group, members need to have social beliefs to necessitate the process. The beliefs should be aimed at ensuring group members are motivated to act in the situation of conflict. Some of the very basic group beliefs which can create good ethos include; the belief of fairness, self and group security, positive self-appearance, belief of one’s own condemnation or victimization, making the opponent’s ideas legitimate, belief of patriotism, believing in peace and unity in the group. The underlined beliefs are vital in solving any group conflict (Leigh, Jiunwen and Brian, 2009). Case study The case study entails the societal conflict in South Africa in the early 1980s. In the study, I wanted to understand the causes of the conflict and how the communities involved were able to solve the conflict. The conflict had been reported to exist for a period of four years. The study identified the causes of the conflict as land, cultural beliefs, the manner in which the different groups solved their problem, and the differences in the domination of power. The conflict was also reported to have the very complicated impact on the community’s way of life. According to the study, the conflicting society decided to solve their conflict through negotiation. The negotiation process was controlled by the following factors; time available negotiation, communication media, the societal position of the people who were involved in negotiation, culture, social group identity, trust affect, gender, and power. Additionally, in the negotiation process, they decided to come up with common beliefs, which entailed the respect of everyone’s life, whereby they ensured that the direction of reconciliation was based on protection of the society. The conflicting communities in South Africa specialized on restoring the past by resolving the past discrimination, killing torture and other violation of human rights. The reconciliation process was also based on the elements of truth, justice, mercy, peace, and future (Zegeye, 1998). Analysis The South African conflict existed for a long period of time among societies which have lived and hoped to live together for a long time. Therefore, there was the need for negotiation to solve their conflicting issues. The causes of the conflict were the issues which involved land, culture and the method they use to solve their problem. In my analysis, I noted that the two conflicting parties have very different cultural practices. Their differences in the way they're solved their conflicting situation is what extended the conflict. Due to the impact of the conflict to their resources, they opted for negotiation to understand their differences and solve the conflict. In the negotiation process, it was evident that the conflicting groups undervalued the female gender’s opinions and in most cases, they were not involved in the discussion. The face-to-face form of communication was very important in addressing their issues since every party had time to understand the facial expression of the pain of the conflict. Psychological Perspectives Psychological Perspective on Reconciliation The perspective was coined by Bar –Tal in 1998. Reconciliation psychological perspective is a psychological framework that entails social cultural procedure that involves the majority of the society members. The involved members form new beliefs and ideas about their own relationship, society and the entire interaction between the conflicting parties. The process of coming with new beliefs may start independently or may be accompanied by the reconciliation process. This perspective is more practical in the intractable intergroup conflict. This is due to the need for change in the ethos that initiates conflict. The perspective further states that the conflictive ethos helps the society cope with the conflict. It further indicates that the backbone of reconciliation is the change of conflictive ethos, which is the cause of continued conflict (Max, Jared, Don, and Kathleen, 2000). The Behavioral Decision Perspective The perspective was a modification of Bazerman and Neale in 1992.The perspective advocate for the recognition of the importance of describing the opponent rather than assuming the opponent is rational in the negotiation process. It further states that the process of negotiation is not credible to giving information on the negotiator's opinion, as it does not follow rational strategy. The groundwork information is also paramount in the negotiator decision-making process. The perspective also explains the importance of vocal communication in negotiation process (Max, Jared, Don, and Kathleen, 2000). Upgraded analysis In the process of negotiation and reconciliation, the conflictive those are very fundamental. They create a very complicated and painful process that determines the reconciliation process destiny. On the other hand, the face-to-face communication channel is the core media that is inevitable in the negotiation process. This is because it creates a deep understanding of the negotiator's opinion on the conflict, which is a reflection of what happens in the grassroots. According to the perspective on the behavioral decision-making process, there is the need for the rational strategy that can facilitate a permanent solution. The warring South African communities got the deep insight of the situations from the background information, which they used as the base for the permanent and practical solution. Additionally, according to the perspective on reconciliation, it is clear that conflictive ethos leads to the social identity in the society. Therefore, coming up with a common belief is a sense of trust and the intense desire to end the conflict (Max, Jared, Don, and Kathleen, 2000). Conclusion It is clear from the study that negotiation is the pillar to reconciliation and the attainment and maintenance of peace among various groups. Conflict is inevitable among the coexisting group, which have conflicting and different social identity. Therefore, an understanding of the negotiation process and its components are very relevant. The paper also touches on the perspectives that are common in understanding the interrelationship between conflict and negotiation. The meaning and importance of some common negotiation components are expounded in the writing. References Leigh, L., Jiunwen, W. and Brian, C. (2009). Negotiation. The Journal of Annual Review of Psychology Online At Psych. Annual Review.org, 61, 491-515. Max, H., Jared, R., Don, A and Kathleen L. (2000). Negotiation. Journal of Annual Review Psychology, 51, 279-314 Zegeye, A. (1998). The path to democracy: The case of South Africa truth and reconciliation process. Social Identities Journals, 4, 541-554 Read More