The Efficiency of Pirate Negotiators
Piracy has been in the news in recent years as attacks and hijackings have increased dramatically since 2006. It also has been the subject of two excellent movies, Captain Phillips with Tom Hanks and the lesser‐known but riveting Danish film, A Hijacking. And now William Donohue, Franziska Pugh, and Sharmaake Sabrie have reported on interviews with former Somali pirates who describe their roles and how ransom negotiations are organized.
The authors set out to use the extortionate transactions (bargaining over human lives) framework to understand the hostage negotiation process in Somali pirate hijackings. They had an undergraduate student from Somalia conduct interviews with the former pirates, now refugees in Europe. They learned about the sophisticated operations and rules for ransom negotiations and how the pirates manage the extortionate paradoxes. The process is straightforward and efficient with few people involved on each side. It's a business purely based on profit, and negotiations are conducted mostly by fax, providing little opportunity to follow typical hostage negotiation protocol.
The authors also touch upon reasons why many Somalis have turned to piracy, including the belief that increased shipping around their country has destroyed their fisheries, leaving many jobless. Their story helps further understand the negotiation process, and the research provides another hostage negotiation context to expand our understanding of crisis negotiation.
Source: Donohue, W., F. Pugh, and S. Sabrie. 2014. Somali piracy negotiations: Resolving the paradoxes of extortionate transactions. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 7(3): 173–187.
Ethical Liars
Cynics might say that the term negotiation ethics is an oxymoron. In truth, many people strive to be ethical in their dealings. But that begs the question of what behavior actually is upright. In a recent article, Emma Levine and Maurice Schweitzer caution that lying sometimes can be prosocial.
Research on the interpersonal consequences of deception typically focuses on lies that are motivated by self‐interest — including the prospect of financial or social gains — and believed to be immoral. Levine and Schweitzer's studies, which include use of “The Number Game” exercise and an online survey, explore moral judgments regarding prosocial lies and demonstrate that lying is often perceived as moral if it is done to help others.
Their findings suggest the importance of a broader conceptualization of deception, and that prosocial lying, often arising from the liar's desire to be polite, reflects a violation of an ethical rule in order to care for another person. Their work also contributes to the literature on moral dilemmas by creating a framework for exploring a common type of ethical dilemma.
Source: Levine, E., and M. Schweitzer. 2014. Are liars ethical? On the tension between benevolence and honesty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 53: 107–117.
The Dark Side of First Offers
An abundance of psychological research demonstrates how making the first offer in negotiations can anchor counterparts’ expectations and thus favorably shape perceptions of the zone of possible agreement. But a recent study by Ashleigh Shelby Rosette, Shirli Kopelman, and JeAnna Lanza Abbott suggests that this advantage may come at an emotional cost.
They designed two tests to empirically examine how first offers influence negotiator anxiety and satisfaction. They found negotiators who made the first offer were less satisfied with the negotiated process and outcome, and experienced greater anxiety at the beginning of the negotiation. And anxiety about being taken advantage of by the other party was more of a concern to negotiators who made the first offer.
These findings indicate that negotiation preparation must go beyond giving strategic advice on anchoring to include role‐playing first offers and consider how to reduce anxiety and walk away from the table with an advantageous economic outcome and feelings of satisfaction.
Sources: Rosette, A. S., J. Abbott, and S. Kopelman. 2014. Good grief! Anxiety sours the economic benefits of first offers. Group Decision Negotiations 23(3): 629–647.
If the River Runs Dry
Natural resource experts and strategic analysts agree that conflicts over water rights will become increasingly intense in coming years. Water is needed for agriculture, industry, and, most fundamentally, for sustenance. Keith Hipel, Marc Kilgour, and Rami Kinsara have reviewed past water conflicts along the Euphrates River to uncover what they can teach us about constructive solutions in the future.
The rate of renewal for Middle Eastern rivers is decreasing because of population growth and increasingly arid conditions. The Euphrates originates in Turkey and flows through Syria and Iraq. Water conflicts in the region became serious in the 1960s when Turkey began building dams for electricity and irrigation, limiting flow to Syria and Iraq. Using the graph model for conflict resolution, this article examines the 1975, 1990, and 1998 water conflicts between Turkey and Syria and/or Iraq that escalated to almost full‐scale war.
They found that developing a water resources plan without the cooperation of the other countries that share the same resource can create conflict. And if one country holds the geographical and military power, unbiased agreements are difficult to achieve. However, they did find a vital role for third‐party intervention in resolving conflicts. So, while these conflicts are still evolving, this research can serve as a framework for carrying out in‐depth analysis in other regions.
Source: Hipel, K., M. Kilgour, and R. Kinsara. 2014. Strategic investigations of water conflicts in the Middle East. Group Decision and Negotiation 23(3): 355–376.
