It pays to find out what the other side is thinking, then adjust your position accordingly.

When facing a cross-border negotiation, the standard preparatory assessments—of the parties, their interests, their no-deal options, opportunities for and barriers to creating and claiming value, the most promising sequence and process design, etc.— should be informed and modified by two classes of potentially relevant cross-border factors, the general and the negotiation-specific. Drawing on considerable literature in cross-border and cross-cultural negotiation, this paper develops the first two levels of a four-level prescriptive framework for effectively carrying out such assessments:

1. Common expectations for surface behavior: etiquette, protocol, and deportment. A surface-level assessment informs one about local expectations concerning greetings, business cards, gift giving, dress, punctuality, body language, table manners, and so forth.
2. Deeper cultural characteristics and their implications for the negotiation process itself. Below the surface are characteristics such as whether a culture is focused on the individual or the collective, the nature and importance of relationships, how personal space and the role of time are viewed, the extent to which authority and hierarchy are accepted, how ambiguity and risk are regarded, and so on. Extending this assessment to expectations that are more specific to the negotiation process itself yields several questions: Is there a view that negotiation is a collaborative process aimed at mutual advantage or a competitive battle? Should one focus on specific issues early on or is there a lengthy process of relationship building first? Is the process formal or informal? Is communication direct or indirect? Are agreements constructed from general principles "down" or from specific provisions "up"? And so on.
3. The bulk of this essay develops these two points but with some strong caveats against stereotyping, overemphasizing national culture, falling prey to potent psychological biases in cross-cultural perception, as well as potentially adapting "past" one's counterpart. [A close companion paper-"Assess, Don't Assume, Part II: Decision Making, Governance, and Political Economy in Negotiation"—elaborates the importance to effective negotiating strategy and tactics of incorporating two less well-studied factors beyond etiquette and deeper cultural characteristics: 3) systematic cross-border differences in decision making, governance, and 4) the broader economic and political context for negotiation as well as salient "comparable" deals.]

When facing a negotiation that crosses national borders and/or cultures, the standard preparatory assessments—of the parties, their interests, their no-deal options, opportunities for and barriers to creating and claiming value, the most promising sequence and process design, etc.—should be informed and modified by potentially relevant factors. Drawing on considerable literature in cross-border and cross-cultural negotiation, a two-paper series develops a four-level prescriptive framework for effectively carrying out such assessments. The first paper in this series ("Etiquette and National Culture in Negotiation") described:

1. common expectations for surface behavior
2. some implications of deeper cultural characteristics for the negotiation process itself, as well as cross-border caveats such as stereotyping and overemphasizing national culture to the exclusion of other factors. The current paper carries this analysis further by systematically analyzing a third and fourth class of factors that often prove critical in cross-border dealmaking
3. The decision-making and governance processes that are the targets of influence efforts. While negotiations take place with individuals, those individuals are typically enmeshed in organizational processes and cultures. Thus, a key assessment focuses on the organization's decision-making and governance processes. Several questions guide this analysis: Who has what decision rights? Is it a one-person authoritarian process? A simple consensus? A multi-stage consensus process? A key subgroup? How does the formal decision-making and governance process differ from the informal one?
4. The broader economic and political context for negotiation as well as salient "comparable" deals. Several questions guide this analysis: Is there a formal or informal government policy toward the kind of arrangements under negotiation such as the requirement that the majority of a joint venture be owned by a local partner? Are high-tech deals particularly sought after by the state? What recent deals by others, successful or not, will be salient in the minds of your local hosts and authorities when they contemplate yours? Does the political ethos favor state control or privatization? Does a wrenching political transition foster managerial uncertainty and decision paralysis? And so on.

Whether negotiating to purchase a company or a house, dealmaking is becoming more complex. Harvard Business School professor Guhan Subramanian sees a new form arising, part negotiation, part auction. Call it the negotiauction. Here's how to play the game.

With expressions like 'out of sight, out of mind', one would make a natural assumption that there's a lot to be gained from direct face-to-face communication. However, according to Roderick Swaab, Assistant Professor of Organisational Behaviour at INSEAD, being able to see others and making eye contact may not always be the best thing.

A successful deal may hinge on the ability to create trust — or uncover deception.

Silence is the secret tool of power negotiators. Knowing when to listen, not talk. Using facial expressions, not your voice, to make a point. Here are five tips on how perfecting the art of silence can make you a better negotiator.

"Negotiators who are quick to label the other party 'irrational' do so at great potential cost to themselves," say HBS professors Deepak Malhotra and Max H. Bazerman. Their new book, Negotiation Genius, combines expertise in psychology with practical examples to show how anyone can improve dealmaking skills. In this excerpt, Malhotra and Bazerman describe what to do when the other party's behavior does not make sense.

A study suggests that subtly imitating mannerisms, gestures, etc., of the other partner during a face-to-face negotiation can lead to greater success for both parties.

A businessman often convinces himself that he is completely logical in his behavior when in fact the critical factor is his emotional bias compared to the emotional bias of his opposition. Unfortunately, some businessmen and students take the attitude that competition is some kind of impersonal, objective, colorless affair.

Editor's Note: written in 1968...

As business becomes increasingly global and large numbers of international mergers and acquisitions continue to take place, you may soon find yourself having to negotiate with people from cultures very different from your own.

The right strategy and preparation are important elements in successful negotiation, but unless we use the right verbal and nonverbal communication we may never get what we want. Knowing the rules that that can set the tone or "code" of a negotiation, and how we can successfully switch that code, is vitally important. Without that knowledge, this author points out, we may never get what we want.

The right strategy and preparation are important elements in successful negotiation, but unless we use the right verbal and nonverbal communication we may never get what we want. Knowing the rules that can set the tone or "code" of a negotiation, and how we can successfully switch that code, is vitally important. Without that knowledge, this author points out, we may never get what we want.

I count 21 not 27 "principles" in this article and not all are really principles. Nothing leading-edge but a useful and short collection to use as a checklist or reminder in negotiations.

Interpersonal Deception Theory ("IDT") attempts to explain the manner in which individuals while engaged in face-to-face communication deal with, on the conscious and subconscious levels, actual or perceived deception. IDT proposes that the majority of individuals overestimate their ability to detect deception. This paper examines the theory and offers 10 suggestions for dealing with deception in negotiations.

To get what you want in life requires constant negotiation. Discover the Six Laws of Negotiation and how to communicate persuasively.

"Negotiation is increasingly a way of life for effective managers," say HBS professor James Sebenius and colleague David Lax. Their new book, 3-D Negotiation, describes how you can shape important deals through tactics, deal design, and set-up, and why three dimensions are more powerful than one. Here's a Q&A and book excerpt.

Following the adoption of a collective bargaining agreement in 2005, National Hockey League GMs had one month to absorb the new rules and put a team together. How to best negotiate in an uncertain environment? Michael Wheeler advises looking to military science for winning strategies.

Most of us trust our intuition more than we should, especially when the pressure is on in negotiations. Professors Max Bazerman and Deepak Malhotra on negotiating more rationally. From Negotiation. Key concepts include:
* Too much trust in intuition can lead to irrational decisions.
* Employ "System 2" thinking to apply logic even in times of stress and indecision.
* In negotiations, schedule more time than you think you will need.

Negotiation plays an important role in effecting a successful sales process. It helps in achieving the sales objectives without making the other party concede too much. In other words, effective negotiation helps in developing a 'win-win' situation for the buyer and the seller. The paper outlines six steps for effective utilization of negotiation in a successful sales process. [BNET Annotation]

Every individual has a prominent negotiating style. Being able to determine theirs and knowing up-front what to expect can produce dramatic results. Most business people will fall into one of four categories: competitor, collaborator, compromiser or pleaser.

"Concessions are often necessary in negotiation" says HBS professor Deepak Malhotra. "But they often go unappreciated and unreciprocated." Here he explains four strategies for building good will and reciprocity.

Gender is not a good predictor of negotiation performance, but ambiguous situations can trigger different behaviors by men and women. Here is how to neutralize the differences and reduce inequities.

Just as negotiating has become an ongoing process, so too has learning new negotiating techniques. "Improving your negotiation skills," write the co-authors of this article, "is a long journey that involves constant reflection, awareness, and openness to feedback." In the article, a valuable and extremely useful primer for negotiators, they describe and outline the preparation, value-claiming and value-creating strategies that are the foundation of any successful negotiation.

Editor's Note: the title doesn't really convey the purpose of this article which is to provide analysis and advice for real-life negotions...and it really is valuable advice.

This paper examines the effect trust and respect has on the strategies used to negotiate, as well as the outcomes of that negotiation. The authors define trust as "the willingness to be vulnerable to another person in the absence of monitoring or the belief that a person does not intend to deceive or harm the trusting person." Respect is "the value one is shown in the way he or she is treated or the level of esteem for another individual based on one's own values."

The authors conclude that respect is important to a successful negotiation, but too much trust can, in fact, lead to a worse outcome for a negotiator. Respect engenders respect from opponents at the table and, as a result, it increases the possibility of mutual problem solving and is vital in achieving creative solutions. Trust, by contrast, tends to dull the competitive edge of negotiators, often leading them to give away their bargaining chips without improving their ability to come up with imaginative compromises. In other words, the authors argue, if you want to get a better deal, respect the people you are negotiating with, but don't trust them for a minute. [s+b annotation]