Multiparty Negotiation: Ham And Egg Company

Multiparty negotiations are those that include more than two parties or groups. These can include companies, organizations, countries, or any other interest groups. We are thus speaking here of multilateral discussions, in contrast to bilateral discussions. Multiparty negotiations are distinguished from one-on-one negotiations by the possibilities for coalition-forming, the complexity of the social interactions involved, and the kaleidoscopic structure of the multiparty negotiation process.

< INSERT Image8.jpg>

The Ham & Egg Company

An enterprising chicken convinces a profit-hungry pig to partner with him to launch a business. “It’ll be called HEC – The Ham & Egg Company,” says the chicken. “I’ll deliver fresh eggs every day, you take

If a coalition no longer serves your interests, then you can take the opportunity to reach out to new potential partners and form new coalitions. You can also change whatever had motivated your partners to join you in the coalition, making it more attractive for them to seek out new partnerships elsewhere. Imagine that you have partnered with a competitor in order to get a discount from a supplier on the basis of the large quantity that you will purchase together. If your coalition partner decides to drastically lower the amount that they will purchase, then this partnership will no longer be beneficial you, as you will no longer be able to convince the supplier to give you the volume discount. The coalition no longer serves your

JANIS

In 1982, researcher Irving L. Janis published a book entitled Groupthink. Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. The features of group dynamics discussed in this book are relevant to multiparty negotiations:

• Groups tend to develop their own norms and standards that function as expressions of loyalty. Group members who do not conform run the risk of being excluded from the group. Those who are excluded often feel extreme pressure to be accepted back into the group in order to escape their uncomfortable isolation.

• Groups also often develop their own distribution of roles, with both leaders and followers. Other group members play either inhibiting roles, rejecting new ideas, or innovating roles, actively developing such ideas.

• Another risk of groupthink, according to Janis, can be observed in groups that work together over long periods of time. In addition to reduced efficiency, they also demonstrate reduced “reality testing”, i.e., a distorted sense of reality. Focusing too much on the skills and climate within their own group and not enough on the critical analysis of new approaches and solutions, they end up overestimating the skills and power of their group and developing dismissive attitudes towards others. In some cases, the group can become progressively more extreme in its