Chapter 7

Negotiating Purpose
 Introduction
• The objective of this chapter is to discuss the purpose of
working collaboratively.
• Discussion of purpose are commonly referred to as “objective
setting”, “goal setting” or “clarification of aims”.
• Discussion of purpose can be the main agenda item of a
meeting or can take place implicitly, perhaps over a prolonged
period, as an inevitable implication of the process seeking to
reach agreement about what to do.

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 2

 Negotiation Process
• The negotiation process unfolds two parts: (a) aim ownership and (b) episodes.
a) Aim Ownership:
• During negotiation, each member of the group uses their knowledge and interpretation of what they
take be the aims of the organization
• Organization aims: Since collaborations are set up by individuals acting on behalf of organizations, the
aims of their organizations are likely to be particularly relevant to the negotiation of collaborative
purpose. Group members may, or may not, presume to have complete knowledge of these aims. The
organizations aims may, or may not, connect to the original or officially stated purpose of the
collaboration leading consequently to the fact that these aims are often viewed as part of the “hidden
agenda”.
• Individual aims: Each group member also brings to the process of negotiating the purposes of the
collaboration, an individual set of personal values and constraints, and hence aims. Some of the
individual will influence, and be influenced by collaboration and by any discussion with the group. Some
of them will be, as the organization aims, hidden from the rest of the group.
•Aims owned by the group: the process of working and negotiating together often leads to a sense of a
group identity. Aims that are therefore owned by group, and attributed to the group, may emerge.

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 3

 Negotiation Process
(b) Episodes in Negotiation: We mainly refer in this context to the dynamic of the negotiation
process. We distinguish 10 episodes (check examples in book, pp. 111 – 117 and table 7.1 pp.
120).

1) Cohesive group episodes:

– The members of the group agreeing to take some kind of collective action, in which they know their
organizations would have no interest, characterizes episodes of this type.
– Members may fear that the organization might veto the action and consider it as time wasting
– Members may have to argue each other out of a sense of guilt that they are pursuing business that
is not taken to be legitimate.
– “We are all in this together” attitude evolves.

Long Term Implications:

• Help gaining the commitment of the members and make the best out of the situation
• They may resource consuming or against an organization’s interests
• Would be at risk if any member leave and is replaced by a new representative

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 4

 Negotiation Process
2) Disinterested organization episodes:
– In this kind of episode, members of the group might act in ways that would be
counter to an organization’s intentions
– The organization is viewed as disinterested in the activity proposed and is not
expected to give support to it.
– The individual’s aim is to use the agreement to the activities from the rest of the
group members, with the backing of their organizations, as a lever for changing her
own organization’s views. The individual may or may not declare this strategy to
the rest of the group and presumes that the rest of the group do agree that the
actions are good things to do (e.g.: someone who has a proposal to direct the
organization’s attention towards new activities that are not a concern of the
organization).
– This is a high-risk strategy for the individual that may lead to punishment.
LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 5
 Negotiation Process
3) Outlying individual episodes:
– An individual representative try to promote an activity of the collaborative group which would not be out of interest
to any of the organizations involved, including his own, for his own personal reasons.
– Sometimes the activity might be related to personal career development.
– When the individual’s personal agenda is counterproductive to the group, boundaries should be drawn.
Long Term Implications:
• Other group members will seek to persuade the individual’s organization to send an alternative representative to the
group. Such action will appear as socially unacceptable.

4) Spying organization episodes:

– It is mainly related to collaborations done based on the aim of “spying”.
– The spying organization has little interest in being a part of the collaboration other than to use it as a spying
opportunity.
– When a “spying organization” episode takes place an individual representative actively moves into a data gathering
role, concentrating on extracting material relevant to the specific purposes of their own organization.
– A successful representative of a spying organization will remain unnoticed.
Long Term Implications:
• Suspicion of the possibility for other organizations in the group “going it alone” based on their increased knowledge.

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 6

 Negotiation Process
5) Vetoing individual or vetoing organization episodes:
– This episode happens when one, or more, individuals respond to a proposal put forward
by others.
– It is usually emotional in character and the reaction is seriously negative to the proposal.
– The reaction may be expressed through non-verbal signals and is likely to cause serious
disruption to group harmony.
– Such negative atmosphere does not promote productive work and other group
members might become disinterested which might lead to absenteeism from meetings,
resignation and even collapse of the collaborative group.

Long Term Implications:

• Other group members will seek to persuade the individual’s organization to send an
alternative representative to the group. Such action will appear as socially unacceptable.

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 7

 Negotiation Process
6) Threatened organization episodes:
– This type of episode may be as well described as an attempt by an organization to
veto proposals put forward by others.
– Such action is a response to a stream of proposals seen by the representation as
threatening the “space” of her organization.
– It stems for strategic motives and tends to be more rational than emotional.
– It is characterized either by a representative trying to dissuade or divert the
purpose of the collaboration or the group from acting in the encroaching particular
areas.
– The main intent is to change the outcome of the collaboration: “It’s our patch, you
keep off it”.

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 8

 Negotiation Process
7) Outlying organization episodes:
– This type of episode involves one organization and its representative being out of line with the other –
individual and organizational – members.
– The representative pursues a – usually hidden – agenda, which is consistent with the aims of their own
organization without reference to others or to the joint purpose of the collaboration
– It has similar characteristics to the spying organization episode given that the representative does not omit
that s/he is pursuing her/his organization’s ends.
– If the organization is perceived by the rest of the group to be important to the collaboration, or powerful
with respect to it, the group may be prepared to be tolerant during the episode for the sake of smooth
relationships.

Long Term Implications:

• The opportunity to pursue personal values can increase the chances that the outlying individual will remain
enthusiastic, energetic, and attend group meetings regularly
• It can be argued that it would be wide absorbing individuals’ agendas as long as they are not counterproductive
to the aim of the collaboration. This demand high level of trust

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 9

 Negotiation Process
8) Powerful organization and pragmatic group episodes:
– If an organization is sufficiently powerful, through, for example, having significant
resources to offer to the group, other group members pragmatic response is to accept
the intervention of the powerful organization and compromise their own view as to gain
the resource.
– This episode is driven by recognition on the part of the representative of the powerful
organization that their position allows them to take a directional lead which will allow
him or her to drive personal agendas because the group would naturally presume that
these reflect concerns of the powerful organization.

9) Sceptical group or sceptical individual episodes:

– These episodes occur when there is general lack of commitment to the collaboration
from those in the group.
– They typically arise when collaborations are set by senior managers. Members are sent
as representative and do not have any personal commitment to the organization’s aims

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 10

 Negotiation Process
10) Imposed-upon organization and imposed-upon group episodes:
– This type of episode typically arises when collaborations are externally mandated by, for
example, government.
– External insistence that organizations join in is generally encouraged through a threat to
withdraw resources or to withdraw the opportunity to be involved in future action or
resources
– In this case, the collaborative group is unlikely to address the collaborative purpose with
ownership or commitment.

Long Term Implications (for episodes 9 and 10):

• These recurring episodes may lead to every member gradually realizing that
“nobody wants to be here”. The majority who participate out of routine or duty
(and assuming that others have the same attitude) may gradually discover that
there are a few who are genuinely enthused by the project
LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 11
 Managing Aims in Practice
• Clear, common and agreed aims are essential to success in collaboration and the
common practice that lasting agreement about a way forward is difficult to establish.
• In order to manage aims, we need to use the aims framework along with the episodes
framework which will allow to divise processes, such as workshops, for exploring and
negotiating partners’ aims with the intention of clarifying them and tying them down.
• Such sensitive negotiation process requires “right moments” and sometimes necessitate
the engagement of an external facilitator. The latter are important parts of the act of
managing (in order) to collaborate.
• Preparedness of parties is very important for the process. However, as seen, even when
there is broadly a relationship of goodwill between parties, the explicit sharing of
understanding about aims sometimes leads to unearthing differences that can be
difficult to reconcile. If this happens, the process of negotiation may increase the forces
for collaborative inertia rather than lessen them.

LY - Lebanon Branch - B325 12