Running head: COMMUNICATION AND PERSONALITY IN NEGOTIATION

Communication and Personality in Negotiation Negotiation is the bargaining procedure that occurs between two or more parties seeking to determine a common ground and reach concurrence in settling a matter of mutual concern (Business Dictionary, 2009). This paper will explain a negotiation situation in which I portrayed a customer wanting to purchase a vehicle. The representation will provide a female consumer’s perspective in such negotiation proceedings. In addition, included will be an analysis of the roles of communication and personality in this type of negotiation as well as how each detracted from the negotiation process. A few years back, I was in an automobile accident in which a big-rig truck destroyed the side of my car. As a result, I was in the position of needing a new vehicle. I had good credit plus sufficient funds received for the subsequent accident. I researched the type of vehicle I wanted to purchase and concluded on the amount that I was willing to pay. I decided to procure a new or slightly used Lexus ES 300. All that was left to do was to search out the perfect ES 300 that fulfilled my established criteria, which included a reasonable price, low mileage, substantial warranty and standard features with extras like rims and a sunroof. I prepared in advance my negotiation techniques exercising appropriate communication skills to assist in completing the deal. The strategies included straightforwardness coupled with standing firm on my criteria. My first stop was at a dealership that sold both new and used vehicles. When diving by, I noticed that this particular lot housed many Lexus vehicles although it was not an authorized Lexus dealership. As I drove up into the parking area, I could view the vulture-like salespeople waiting to pounce on me as if I were their prey. Although this seemed intimidating, I anticipated this type of behavior to occur because most employees of this nature work on commission. A male salesperson was the first of the many employees en route to reach me. I explained in detail to him what type of vehicle was of interest as well as the cost I was willing to pay. As we walked toward the Lexus division of the lot, I further continued to clarify my objectives. The salesperson assured me that he understood my needs and had several cars that fit the description and price range that I inquired about purchasing. However, when it came to showing me these vehicles it was a different story. The automobiles he showed failed in many ways to meet the specifications that I clearly suggested. He started showing me cars that were either older Lexus models or other brands. In fact, when I pointed out to him about the cars being older models, he countered with statements like “the car has a beautiful interior and lighted mirror for me to do my makeup.” When he showed me cars that did not have sunroofs, he merely said the dealer could “zoot-zoot” and cut a sunroof into the car. When he showed me different makes of vehicles, he claimed that the cars looked similar to Lexus, which should be all that matters. All these comments clearly changed my outlook of the salesperson and my facial expressions and body language emitted clear signs of displeasure. As a result, I decided to take matters into my own hands and dismiss him as my assistant. I decided to look at the Lexus vehicles on my own and if I noticed one that interested me, I would then request more information and possibly test-drive the car. As I browsed through the Lexus area, I observed two vehicles that seemed to match what I was looking for in a car. I asked to drive both of the cars and decided that one was more befitting to my desires than the other was. The only problem that existed was the automobile cost four thousand dollars more than I wanted to spend. However, I did have a two thousand dollar leeway to bargain with and would only pull out this card when the proper negotiations began. If the dealer were willing to come down two thousand dollars then I could meet him halfway with my bargaining chip. I walked toward the inside of the building where the sales manager was stationed. I could see from the corner of my eye that the original salesperson was following close behind. He approached me and asked if I wanted to make a deal. Of course, I was not enthusiastic to see him as the person to barter with, as our past interaction was not favorable. I believed that he displayed signs of gender bias and treated me insignificantly or less than equal. Even so, I allowed him to walk beside me to the building but instantaneously asked to speak with the sales manager to negotiate any future dealings. As I waited in one of the negotiation rooms, I could over hear the manager with a male client in which he agreed to reduce the auto of his interest by three thousand dollars. My chances appeared optimistic as I could see myself driving the Lexus off the lot. When it came time for my turn to negotiate, the same sales manager administered the dealings. At first, I thought this would be beneficial to my case. However, I realized that this was not the situation. Upon his entering into the room he extended his hand to shake mine and replied “How can I help you pretty little lady?” I ignored the remark and made an offer on the Lexus that was four thousand dollars less than the asking price. The manager responded by taking only three hundred off the asking price. As time progressed, our bartering continued in which the manager austerely reached a five hundred dollar markdown limit. I rejected the offer affirming my final price, which then included the two thousand dollar haggling chip. During this time, the manager attempted to persuade me into buying a look alike Lexus for the price I was willing to pay. The sales manager commented, “Don’t worry your pretty little head about brand names because the car looks just like a Lexus.” Just then, I realized that negotiations had ended or maybe never began. The communication process had completely failed, as did reaching any gratifying conclusion on my part. Consequently, I rose to my feet, grinned politely validating the end of negotiations and walked out the door. The original salesperson hustled after me acting on behalf of the manager declaring he was willing to take more off the price of the Lexus; however, it was too late. I had already exhausted three hours at the negotiation table and had no idea what more truthfully meant. Therefore, I entered into my automobile and drove off the lot trying not to look back at what might have been. Communication is the skill and practice of using words effectively to convey information or ideas as well as the exchange of thoughts, messages, or data as by speech, signals, writing, or behavior (The Free Dictionary, 2009). More important, communication refers to the perception, interpretation, and response of people to signals produced by other people. During communication, persons are incline to send verbal and nonverbal messages, words, gestures, facial expressions and so forth whereas others are responsible for observing, interpreting, and responding to these messages. The role that communication played in my situation was both verbal and nonverbal. The communication process began verbally and symbolically in which the exchange of words and other formalities facilitated the course. The salesperson greeted me at my vehicle with words and a handshake and I acknowledged his presence by returning the gesture and expressing cordial words. Then communication became more personal as I consciously related to him through words what I was in the market of buying. I created the message, and it was his responsibility to decode what I was saying. Our face-to-face transaction implied communication as a simultaneous and multidirectional process regardless of whom was speaking at any given moment. The nonverbal aspect of communication was noticeable through the various gestures portrayed in the scenario. First, when the salesperson pointed out to me the “pretty mirrors” in the car that I had no interest in, my facial expression disclosed extreme disappointment. My body language changed as I began to feel uncomfortable with the assigned employee. Upon dealing with the sales manager, there was the exchange of both verbal and nonverbal messages in which words were clearly spoken concerning my interest in a particular Lexus and the cost I was willing to pay. The negotiation aspect began with offers and counteroffers that were orally expressed according to a numerical scale. Unfortunately, what could have been a dynamic and interactive process was subject to situational constraints and any revised parameters of this session never reached a mutual settlement point (Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2005, p. 166). In addition, nonverbal messages were transmitted on paper in the form of symbolic numbers and mathematical calculations in which the movement of my head clearly denoted a negative response. There also existed the use of body language in which I would cross my arms or project other signs of discontent and frustration all the while realizing that at some point effective communication had halted. Because communication is a complex process involving human senses, feelings, meanings and experiences, a simple matter of using nouns and verbs was not enough. Many sources of distortion and error crept into our signal circuits complicating what could have been a simple signal response. Personality is complex of attributes such as behavioral, temperamental, emotional, and mental that characterizes a unique individual (Merriam Webster, 2009). Understanding the various personality types that exist is crucial in effective negotiations. However, mishandled personality differences create havoc in negotiations as much as any other factor. The problem is not due to the different personalities that exist, but the fact that many people do not know how to work with others whose personalities are markedly different, waste their energy trying to get those with dissimilar personalities to change or are unwilling to work with people who are different from themselves. In my negotiation situation, I found the later to be most true. The role that personality played in this process focused primarily on stereotypical differences relevant to gender. I could not escape one of the important influences of culture, the effect of gender roles in society especially in the automotive world. Because I am a woman entering into a man’s domain, my treatment was different. The initial communication with the salesperson was gender oriented in which he pointed out the specific interior features that would impress only a female. For example, the lighted mirrors for doing makeup and the beautiful interior, which offered no inclination on how the vehicle ran or stood in test records. In addition, both the salesperson and the manager both tried to push a look alike Lexus off on me to buy as if I would not know the difference between the imitation car and the genuine thing. They projected the belief that my interest concerning the automobile was primarily because of its interior and exterior beauty rather than any proven record of accomplishment on Lexus cars in the automotive industry. In the negotiation room, the communication was further condescending and one sided in which I believed to be sending the messages but the other side was not receiving the signals as such was distorted by our biological differences. In fact, I do not recall the sales manager once referring to me by my given birth name as opposed to “pretty lady.” I justly believe that if I were a man bartering about the same vehicle I would have driven off the lot with the Lexus of my choice. What becomes obvious in this scenario is that negotiations failed due to a breakdown or lack of effective communication followed by distorted perceptions and subjective judgments concerning gender. I walked into the environment prepared to negotiate knowing that the process could be time consuming and arduous. My advantages included knowledge about the particular vehicle intended to purchase, enough cash to pay for the vehicle outright or good credit to finance the overture, an ability to analyze offers and counteroffers and an understanding of the nuances involved in the concession making process. My goals and interests were clear and my ability to articulate this to the other party was straightforward. However, despite all the preparations and skills I performed, my disadvantage proposed the biggest threat to the negotiation process. Such disadvantage stemmed primarily from my inherent biological structure that inhibited any impartiality toward effective communication and successful negotiation. I realize that the goal of negotiations is achieving a valued outcome and not just an agreement (Lewicki et al, 2009, p. 519). As a strong negotiator, a person must be willing to walk away because no agreement is better than a poor one and no process should be offensive. Although I focused on achieving intended goals despite obvious negative signs or better judgment, I seemed to want to win or reach consensus more than anything at all. I almost lost sight on how degrading the whole experience had become. I realized that my decision to walk away and not look back was the best one I could have made that provided a better outcome as well. The following day I went to an authorized respectable Lexus dealer and purchased the vehicle I preferred. Because of this, I will always remember the saying “when one door closes another one opens up” as that was exactly what happened.

References
Business Dictionary (2009). Negotiation. Retrieved October 4, 2009, from www.businessdictionary.com
Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M., & Barry, B. (2005). Negotiation. (5th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Merriam Webster (2009). Personality. Retrieved October 4, 2009, from www.merriam-webster.com
The Free Dictionary (2009). Communication. Retrieved October 4, 2009, from www.thefreedictionary.com