Rabia Mustafa* and Sharafat A. Chaudhry**
Roger Fisher and William Ury, authors of the influential book “Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In”, emphasize the prevalence of positional bargaining in various types of negotiations, whether involving contracts, family disputes, or international peace settlements. Positional bargaining, they explain in the initial chapter titled “Don’t Bargain Over Positions” is the tendency for individuals to adopt a fixed stance, vigorously defending it against any challenges. The authors caution against this approach, highlighting its potential to detrimentally impact negotiations and result in a stalemate.
The proposed solution to this challenge is to shift the focus from positional bargaining to a more constructive approach that involves discussing, arguing, and negotiating over the actual problem at hand. In this context, the role of language emerges as a critical factor in navigating the complexities of the negotiation process.
Numerous functions of language can be employed during problem-solving scenarios, prompting the question: why limit oneself to a singular function? These functions encompass:
- Expressive function: Language serves to articulate thoughts, observations, needs, and feelings.
- Instrumental function: Language operates as a powerful tool, signifying identities, influencing credibility through the defense of ideas, functioning as a control mechanism, and eliciting specific responses based on the speaker’s identity and context.
- Productive function: Language can create enjoyment and amusement.
- Dynamic function: Language is inherently dynamic, constantly evolving with the introduction of new words and shifts in the meanings of existing ones.
- Relational function: Language can both unite individuals through a shared reality and create division through unsupportive and divisive messages.
By recognizing the multifaceted nature of language and its various functions, negotiators can enhance their ability to navigate discussions effectively, fostering a more collaborative and productive approach to problem-solving.
Comprehending the diverse facets of language holds the potential to enhance communication effectiveness, foster cultural richness, strengthen social cohesion, and cultivate robust relationships, among other benefits. Conversely, negatively employing language can yield harmful consequences at both individual and societal levels, giving rise to misunderstandings, conflicts, emotional losses, and division. Consequently, the impact of language, whether positive or negative, is significant in the realm of negotiations.
Illustrating the role of language in negotiations on an international scale offers valuable insights into how employing language as a problem-solving tool can alter the course of discussions. Following the fall of Saddam Hussein, a conflict emerged in Iraq involving displaced farmers and the national oil company, revolving around leased land containing oil and escalating toward a potential armed confrontation.
Initially, the oil company adopted an authoritative stance, asserting, “Get off our land.” The farmers, in response, firmly declared, “It’s our land, and we’re not leaving.” The exchange continued in a confrontational manner with threats involving the police and the army. This dialogue reflected a rigid and uncompromising use of language, where both parties clung obstinately to their positions.
The turning point came when an official, versed in alternative positional bargaining, intervened. By delving into the oil company’s timeline and the farmers’ pressing need for harvest, a compromise was reached. The farmers were allowed to harvest, and the oil company could proceed with its plans, even considering future collaboration with the farmers.
Critical to this resolution was the official’s attentive listening to both sides, aiming to comprehend the underlying problems rather than merely acknowledging each side’s statements. The use of language as a tool to grasp each other’s problems proved instrumental. Through this approach, the negotiator not only prevented the situation from worsening but also facilitated improvement. This scenario underscores that language, when employed to genuinely understand and address problems, can transform situations positively.
Continue…
* The writer is a Linguist and Senior Research Fellow at School for Law and Development
** The writer is an Advocate, an internationally accredited mediator, and the author of Law and Development.