Negotiation-Blog C4

In August, the European Union signed a framework agreement for more than 400 million vaccine doses with the pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca[1]. The drug was then approved by the European Medicines Agency on Jan. 29, 2021[2]. However, a week earlier the manufacturer surprised by announcing a reduction in supply[3]. According to the EU Commission, less than 40 percent of the expected quantity was to arrive in the foreseeable future[4]. The EU Commission was incensed, because it had promised the Swedish-British company 336 million Euros to increase production since it signed the contract in August, and had already paid out some of this money. According to the EU’s reading, the pharmaceutical company should have been stockpiling production. However, the EU’s accusations and displeasure are based on the “principle of hope” against the manufacturer, where instead clear agreements would actually have been necessary. But “clarity” was replaced here by “ambiguity”. Oscar Wilde left…

In our everyday professional life, we repeatedly experience situations which make clear the difference between male and female behaviour. For example: Before the start of a meeting, a projector must first be set up. In this situation, a man asks directly “Can somebody here fix the device?” — a woman, on the other hand, first tries to find the problem herself. And then the parties involved perceive each other very differently, which has an effect on the course of the negotiation that follows. From the woman’s point of view, the man is behaving pompously and arrogantly, whereas the man sees weakness in the woman’s concern.

The COVID-19 Pandemic has restricted face-to-face meetings and travel. However, negotiations and deal-making are still possible. This is because modern technology supports negotiations — if you follow certain rules.

The European Union is facing enormous challenges in times of Corona. Unfortunately, it is impossible to negotiate with a virus. But what if negotiations between states don‘t work either? Will there be a return of the nation state after Corona, or does the current crisis offer the potential to further advance European integration?

When attempting to achieve better negotiation results, the strategic use of emotions is often the key. In particular, anger, which is displayed in the form of aggressive negotiating, is a favorite method of intimidating one’s negotiating partner and persuading them to make concessions. However, the use of emotions in negotiations should be carefully thought through, as they can easily have the opposite effect. So, does it pay to negotiate aggressively?

The G7 Summit in Biarritz about a week ago again demonstrated the complexity of international negotiations. Especially in times of egocentric negotiators like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, the outcome of international meetings between heads of government, on topics from escalating trade conflicts and a hopeless Brexit to climate protections and the Iran deal, can hardly be predicted in advance. All these are sensitive issues and it is essential to develop global solutions in these fields. It is not only narcissistic heads of government, however, who often complicate their negotiations on the international stage. Generally put, there are many factors to consider in every type of negotiation when the negotiating partners come from different cultural backgrounds.

She’s done it: Ursula von der Leyen will be the first woman to head the European Commission beginning November 2019. Being elected from the ranks of parliament, including with the votes of the S&D, the Alliance of Social Democrats, only the SPD, due to its unilateral rejection of the von der Leyen campaign, came out of the vote looking bad. But why did the German Social Democrats insist on rejecting her against their better judgement? The answer is the so-called “group thinking” effect, a phenomenon that can be traced back to dysfunctional interaction patterns of a group. This effect can also occur frequently in negotiations and negatively impact their progress and chances of success

The sun is burning, your body is sweating, and your head is screaming for a cool drink and a shady spot to relax. However, the challenges of the workday have called, and a heated negotiation is imminent. These are not exactly ideal conditions to ensure you a concentrated and controlled approach in negotiations. But with a few tips and tricks, you can use these adverse circumstances to your advantage – and negotiate successfully despite hot temperatures.

In the UK Theresa May announced her resignation as party leader on 7th of June and new positions are also being filled in the European Union following the last parliamentary elections. However, an exchange of negotiators also has a decisive influence on the further course of the negotiations and the outcome. These are unpredictable variables for the ongoing Brexit negotiations. On the one hand, this can bring new movement into the stalled situation, while on the other hand it increases the risk of a no-deal exit.

 “Nothing is in the mind that would not have been in perception before,” says an Arab proverb. Listening and observing carefully in negotiations is a critical skill for success. It makes the difference between a right and a wrong decision and leads to a good or bad negotiation result. But is everything really the way we “perceive” it? Or are we subject to distortions and manipulations? As psychologists and behavioral economists have found out in numerous studies, cognitive distortions impair our ability to make good and well-founded judgments. Even if we supposedly rationally enter into a negotiation, research shows that human decisions tend to be flawed and biased.