Three ethical issues in negotiation

Conclusion The overall choice of how to negotiate, whether to emphasize moves that create value or claim it, has implications beyond single encounters. The dynamic that leads individual bargainers to poor agreements, impasses, and conflict spirals also has a larger social counterpart. Without choices that keep creative actions from being driven out, this larger social game tends toward an equilibrium in which everyone claims, engages constantly in behavior that distorts information, and worse.Most people are willing to sacrifice something to avoid such outcomes, and to improve the way people relate to each other in negotiation and beyond. The wider echos of ethical choices made in negotiation can be forces for positive change. Each person must decide if individual risks are worth general improvement, even if such improvement seems small, uncertain, and not likely to be visible. Yet a widespread choice to disregard ethics in negotiation would mark a long step down the road to a more cynical, Hobbesian world.David A. Lax is Assistant Professor at the Harvard Business School, 301 Morgan Hall, Boston, Mass. 02163.James K. Sebenius, on leave as Associate Professor at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, is associated with Peterson Jacobs, a merchant bank in New York. They are the co-authors ofThe Manager as Negotiator (New York: The Free Press, forthcoming).This article is adapted from a section in the authors' forthcoming book,The Manager as Negotiator (New York: Free Press, 1986). The authors are particularly indebted to Howard Raiffa and to the discussion of ethics in his bookThe Art and Science of Negotiation (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982).