The purpose of negotiation is to resolve immediate differences.
These differences are concrete and situation-specific (for
example, what movie to attend or who takes on what household
chore). Immediate differences don't linger to periodically
frustrate us; in this way, they diverge from enduring differences,
the ones that tend to promote continuing conflict and misunderstanding.
Immediate difference negotiation is idea-centered and carries
the expectation that the difference is resolvable. This contrasts
with the "vulnerable" sharing that is essential
to dealing with enduring differences, where the expectation
is that the parties will find a way to "live with"
the difference.
John and Susan are new to parenting after 12 years of
marriage. Following a difficult pregnancy, they recently
welcomed twin girls into their family. Since they expected
the girls to be a "hand full, " they decided that
Susan would stay home for the first year and John would
be the only family wage earner.
Susan does not mind having to manage on her own during
the day, but finds it exasperating that John goes to AA
meetings in the evening, just when there is lots to do at
home. She would like him to stay with her in the evening
and help around the house. Her resentment over his lack
of responsiveness to her pleas is beginning to express itself
in an old problem for her excessive credit card spending.
John has no objection to sharing responsibility for
the girls. He takes care of them on the weekend (together
with Susan) or alone when she leaves the house to run errands
or to visit family and friends. His problem with her request
for assistance in the evening relates to his belief that
regular AA attendance is the bedrock of his sobriety program.
He has been sober for three years and believes that if he
does not keep up with his meetings, he could begin drinking
again -- a situation that would be disastrous for both him
and for his family. He worries about Susan's spending urges
because their income has declined markedly from what it
was prior to the twin's birth.
The Negotiation Process
The goal of negotiation is to arrive at a compromise solution
that allows each party to get some of what he or she wants,
but not everything that is wanted. This problem-solving procedure
is based on certain rules of engagement. In a negotiation
process:
The parties agree on the purpose of the negotiation.
They agree to find a mutual solution rather than to justify
anyone person's particular position. Too often, arguments
continue because the parties insist on being right rather
than ending the argument fairly.
An active listening process is used to ensure that each
person feels "heard". In a negotiation, each
party makes his or her case through the use of simple statements
that reflect the speaker's thoughts and feelings. Restating
and reflecting back the speaker's main points reassures the
speaker that the listener has really gotten the message.
The parties work together to define a "mutual"
problem that incorporates each person's individual concerns:
In this step of the process, each person makes use of what
the other party has told him or her to restate his or her
individual problem in such a way that it includes the concerns
of both parties.
Susan and John agreed that they had to rethink how they
are dealing with evening responsibilities and how they are
spending money.
The parties attempt to "brainstorm" possible
solutions to the mutual problem: A short amount of time
(say, 10 minutes) is set aside for brainstorming, during which
each person lists as many solutions to the mutual problem
as come to mind. Brainstorming requires the parties to be
as creative as possible. The more ideas they generate, the
more likely it is that a mutually satisfying solution can
be reached. No idea is a "bad" one, so nothing should
be held back and each party should take pains not to criticize
solutions offered by the other during this process.
Susan and John came up with these possibilities:
Get a "mothers" helper.
Susan goes to Al-Anon meetings.
Lock-up all credit cards.
Susan goes back to work.
Cut back on all expenses.
Susan starts exercising.
Susan and John get couples' therapy.
Reduce number of AA meetings.
Get financial counseling.
Cut up all credit cards.
Get John's sister to baby-sit.
John goes to AA downtown.
John discontinues AA.
Keep only one credit card.
All ideas that are generated through brainstorming are
reviewed: At this point, all ideas (even the odd ones)
are examined with an eye toward their potential for resolving
the mutual problem. The task here is to identify the three
best solutions and to determine the advantages and disadvantages
of each.
The following were Susan and John's top three solutions:
1) John goes to AA downtown; 2) Susan goes to Al-Anon meetings;
and 3) They restrict their credit card use.
The parties choose a solution: The chosen solution
must be one that both parties can "live with," even
if it does not reflect the "heart's desire" of either
person.
John agreed to brown bag his lunch and to attend noontime
AA meetings near his workplace three days a week. Susan
agreed to attend one AI-Anon meeting on one of John's nights
at home and curtail her spending for unnecessary items.
They cancelled all but one credit card and kept it at home
to be used for "special" purchases that they agreed
to talk about and plan for together.
Each person shares what he or she has learned from this
process: A critical step that is often overlooked is the
"rehashing" of what has been learned by each party.
When each person shares what has been learned, each creates
a memory of the process that will come in handy the next time
an argument erupts.
John learned that in his eagerness to "follow the
program, " he was being insensitive to his wife's needs.
He learned that when he was flexible about how he did what
he had to do to stay sober, he could find a way of meeting
both his needs and those of his wife. Susan, for her part,
became more aware of her compulsion to spend when she was
stressed and that she needed to understand better the family
dynamics involved in alcoholism.