Fair is Fair...in Negotiation and in Life

Fair is Fair...in Negotiation and in Life What's Fair: Ethics for Negotiators. Edited by Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Michael Wheeler. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley imprint (www.josseybass.com), 2005. Hardcover. 542 pages. $55.

Is negotiation inherently deceptive? Does a person need to lie,

even just a little, to get what he or she wants? Without strategic misrepresentation, would negotiation be simply impossible? These are questions worth pondering, not only by professional negotiators, but by every reader. After all, everyone negotiates all the time in ways big and small-when buying a car, or asking for a pay raise, or defining your teenager's driving privileges.

Carrie Menkel-Meadow, the book's co-editor, says every negotiator faces a fundamental dilemma: whether to act as you would want others to act toward you, or as you might expect them to act in a competitive world. Reading this book, it's clear that there's no single or simple answer, which makes this work all the more important. This book is a compilation of articles contributed by 37 authors, including academicians, lawyers, judges, and a former White House staffer and consultant. It explores different teachings strategies, and perspectives on what is ethical, moral, or fair in negotiations.

Three Schools of Ethics

G. Richard Shell's coordinator identifies three schools of bargaining ethics: the "poker" school, idealist school, and the pragmatist school. The first sees negotiation as a game-like poker-that follows certain rules. In the game of bargaining, bluffing is a given, but the rule of law is also paramount. A player may (and should) bluff, but hiding cards or reneging on one's bets is not allowed.

The idealist school draws its strength from religion and philosophy. It believes that bargaining is an integral part of social life. The same ethics that you uphold in your personal life should apply in negotiation. If it's wrong to lie in your relationships, then it's wrong to lie in other types of negotiation. This school, however, does not rule out lying in special situations, such as to spare the other person's feelings.

The pragmatist school has characteristics of the other two schools. It views deception as part of negotiation, but would rather not use deception if there's an alternative. It shuns lying, not because it's wrong, but because it might be costly in the long run.

"Regardless of which school of bargaining ethics you adopt, you are going to face unscrupulous tactics from others on occasion," writes Shell. His advice: Avoid engaging in tit for tat. "As soon as you begin acting unethically, you lose the right to protest other people's conduct ... Once you join them in the gutter, you forfeit your moral and legal advantage," he says.

Ethics of Respect

Most discussions of negotiation ethics center on deception, disclosure and fairness, but Jonathan R. Cohen's piece introduces another key factor: respect. He notes that in negotiation, the other party is both a human being and a means to an end. "Most moral and religious traditions require that people be seen and treated as beings with fundamental dignity. "An implication of that view is that ethical negotiation requires one to respect the fundamental dignity of the other party," he writes.

But, what if you don't respect the other party to begin with? In answer, Cohen cites the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who said, "Peace you don't make with friends, but with very unsympathetic enemies." Cohen says that respect for another person rests not on how he or she has treated you, but on the basis of the other party's personhood. "How the other party treats you defines him, but how you treat the other party defines you," he writes. The good news is that being ethical need not always mean self-sacrifice, according to Cohen. Respect usually begets respect and even cooperation.

Noble Lie

Sissela Bok's contribution tackles the kind of ethical dilemma faced by public officials-lying in the name of the public good. The Greek philosopher Plato called it the "noble lie."

Bok discusses examples from a broader ethical realm, such as an election campaign as an indirect form of negotiation between a candidate and the voters. During the 1964 presidential campaign, President Johnson professed to be the candidate of peace and portrayed his opponent, Senator Barry Goldwater, as an aggressive war hawk. He did this despite growing pressure within his administration to escalate hostilities in Vietnam. Johnson won the election and the United States proceeded to launch massive bombing raids over North Vietnam in 1965. The rest is history.

"Deception of this kind strikes at the very essence of democratic government," writes Bok. "Deceiving the people for the sake of the people is a self-contradictory notion in a democracy."

But the public might not care about a possible lie, or might even prefer to be deceived when frightened or hostile or highly volatile. However Bok says: "The fact that rare circumstances exist where justification for government lying seems powerful creates a difficulty-these same excuses will often be made to serve a great many more purposes."

This excellent book is for all types of negotiators-professionals and aspiring negotiators. It will leave readers looking inward and outward, asking questions, and pondering just what is fair, in negotiation and in life. [For more discussion on ethics, check out Dispute Resolution Ethics: A Comprehensive Guide, edited by Phyllis Bernard and Bryant Garth, reviewed in this Journal's May-July 2003 issue (vol. 58, no. 2)].

SIDEBAR

A WORD OF ADVICE

In What's Fair: Ethics for Negotiators, G. Richard Shell, Thomas Gerrity professor of legal studies and management at the University of Pennsylvania's wharton School, says it's better to stick to the truth because personal integrity is crucial in effective negotiations. Here's advice to the aspiring negotiator:

* Decide which school of bargaining ethics you belong to.

* Determine whether you can use your relationships to offset the dangers of unethical conduct by others involved in the transaction.

* Probe, probe, probe. Do not take what you hear at face value.

* Pause. Remember that you do not have to answer every question.

* Do not lie. Instead, find a way to use the truth to your advantage.