In his article, ‘Honesty in Negotiations', Chris Provis alludes that there has been a consistently prevailing ethical belief that the concept of honesty should at all times remain unconditional. As a result, a good participant in a negotiation must always resist the common temptation towards the engagement in practices that would be deemed as dishonest. This is a significant aspect that should be applicable even in circumstances where the negotiator is dealing with an individual whose honesty is under a cloud of doubt. As postulated by Chris Provis, giving a warning to the negotiating partner in the effect that the information will appear incomplete is an example of a thing that may be perceived as being appropriate in times of negotiation.
When a party to a negotiation comprehends that the other party may make decisions from factors that have the propensity of negatively influencing the process, then the party has a duty of informing the other partner to deal sufficiently with that factor adversely impacting on the negotiation process. It is on this premise that the following article will present a discussion regarding the feelings of Chris Provis on deceptive tactics that come to play during negotiations. It will prescribe whether this is a regular practice during the process of negotiation or if it is an unethical practice. Besides, the article will mention how the vagueness or ambiguity of one will impact the entire process of negotiation.
Based on the concept of morality that is generally promoted in the society, use of deceptive means to attain an aim during negotiations would be considered as an ethical practice. This is because, at any given time, one should not comprise his integrity on the basis of achieving an already prescribed goal. Even though it might only be prudent to offer information only when it is necessary, telling outright lies is not justifiable in the process of negotiations. This basically means that being honest and also open in a manner that is perceived to be wise is instrumental in any negotiation process. ("Negotiation 5: Negotiating with integrity", 2016) Use of tactics and deception can thus not be considered as a normal practice of a negotiation because it would adversely affect the outcomes in the decision making. This makes their use unjustifiable because of the negativity they bring in the process.
In light of this, ambiguity is also considerably a part of deception since it may culminate to the attainment of undesirable results. To mitigate this, the author mentions that negotiators should be sensitive to several factors encompassing utterances, context and syntax and also the tone used in the process. However, a different argument that the concept of vagueness allows the parties to the negotiations to protect themselves has been advanced by Provis. This is because it has been taunted as not deliberately misleading or misguiding the other party in the negotiating process. (Provis, 2000, p. 2) As a result, finding a middle-ground between where to strike the balance is quite significant to ensure that any form of mischief does not arise. In using the concept as an intentional activity in the negotiation, it should solely be employed in the attainment of positive results.
In conclusion, Provis (2000) in his article maintains that the practice of ethical stance in a negotiation process is fundamental for the achievement of the right goals. The above article has thus discussed the concept of negotiation based on the article ‘Honesty in Negotiation.' The ideology, therefore, remains as a viable factor in the promotion of only the best decisions. However, during negotiation processes, several people have often applied deceptive practices to gain undue advantage. Proper care should thus be undertaken for purposes of avoiding extortion or making incorrect decisions in any negotiating process. ("Practical and Ethical Limits to Lying in Negotiations: Protecting Your Reputation as a Trustworthy Negotiator May Matter More than You Think", 2016)
References
Negotiation 5: Negotiating with integrity. (2016). Shell-livewire.org. Retrieved 21 June 2016, from http://www.shell-livewire.org/business-library/employing-people/management/resource-management-working-with-suppliers/Negotiation-5-Negotiating-with-integrity/
Practical and Ethical Limits to Lying in Negotiations: Protecting Your Reputation as a Trustworthy Negotiator May Matter More than You Think. (2016). Mediate.com. Retrieved 21 June 2016, from http://www.mediate.com/articles/young8.cfm
Provis, C. (2000). Honesty in negotiation. Business Ethics: A European Review, 9(1), 3-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8608.00164
