Process Analysis

In this section, the analysis of the process of each negotiation case will be presented. It will be recalled that, the data on the cases was collected by using the Bargaining Process Analysis on the verbatim transcripts of interviews conducted with the parties. Cooperative and competitive indices were developed accordingly for the purpose of the analysis. For each case, a table is created in order to demonstrate the reader the coded statements of both parties throughout the whole negotiation process.

Moreover, the number of statements within the categories of commitments, threats, accommodations and promises will be illustrated separately since the indices are structured on the basis of these categories.

4.2.1 Case 1“Do not move me!”

The coded statements of the first negotiation case are presented in Appendix C.

As the Table 4-2 presents during the negotiation process Çiğdem Doğan and the human resources director applied commitments 5 times and threats 3 times. On the other hand, the parties accommodated 3 times and made promise only 1 time. Therefore, the total number of the hard statements (commitments and threats), is 8. The total number of the soft statements (accommodations and promises) on the other hand, is 4.

Table 4-2: Number of Hard and Soft Statements of Case 1

Number of Commitments (c) 5

Number of Threats 3

Numbers of Accommodations (a) 3

Number of Promises (p) 1

Accordingly the indices for the concerned case can be formulated as follows:

Competitive Index = Hard Statement / Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 67 % Cooperative Index= Soft Statements/ Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 33 % As the above account shows, the value of the competitive index is found to be higher than the cooperative index. Therefore, it can be concluded that the process of the

concerned case is mostly characterized by competitive (hard) behavior rather than cooperative (soft) behavior.

4.2.2 Case 2“He is mine!”

The coded statements of the second negotiation case are illustrated in Appendix D. As the Table 4-3 presents during the negotiation process Akgün Doğan and the credit manager of C Bank applied commitments 1 time and threats 3 times. On the other hand, the parties accommodated 2 times and made promise 1 time. Therefore, the total number of the hard statements (commitments and threats), is 4. The total number of the soft statements (accommodations and promises) on the other hand, is 3.

Table 4-3: Number of Hard and Soft Statements of Case 2

Number of Commitments (c) 1

Number of Threats 3

Numbers of Accommodations (a) 2

Number of Promises (p) 1

Accordingly the indices for the concerned case can be formulated as follows:

Competitive Index = Hard Statement / Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 57 % Cooperative Index= Soft Statements/ Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 43 % According to the above account, the value of the competitive index is higher than the cooperative index. Therefore, it can be concluded that the process of the concerned case is mostly characterized by competitive (hard) behavior rather than cooperative (soft) behavior.

4.2.3 Case 3 “What a donation!”

The coded statements of the second negotiation case are illustrated in Appendix E.

As the Table 4-4 presents during the negotiation process Erinç Ağacıkoğlu and the manager of an intermediary financial institution applied commitments 2 times and threats 1 time. On the other hand, the parties accommodated 2 times and made promise 3 times. Therefore, as illustrated in table….,the total number of the hard statements

(commitments and threats), is 3. The total number of the soft statements (accommodations and promises) on the other hand, is 5.

Table 4-4: Number of Hard and Soft Statements of Case 3

Number of Commitments (c) 2

Number of Threats 1

Numbers of Accommodations (a) 2

Number of Promises (p) 3

Accordingly the indices for the concerned case can be formulated as follows:

Competitive Index = Hard Statement / Hard Statement + Soft Statement =38 % Cooperative Index= Soft Statements/ Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 62 % As the above account shows, the value of the cooperative index is found to be higher than the competitive index. Therefore, it can be concluded that the process of the concerned case is mostly characterized by cooperative (soft) behavior rather than competitive (hard) behavior.

4.2.4 Case 4 “To donate or not to donate?”

The coded statements of the second negotiation case are illustrated in Appendix F.

As the Table 4-5 presents during the negotiation process Ceren Aydoğan and the manager of Merkez Yatırım applied commitments 2 times and threats 2 times as well.

On the other hand, the parties accommodated 3 times and made promise 4 times.

Therefore, the total number of the hard statements (commitments and threats), is 4. The total number of the soft statements (accommodations and promises) on the other hand, is 7.

Table 4-5: Number of Hard and Soft Statements of Case 4

Number of Commitments (c) 2

Number of Threats 2

Numbers of Accommodations (a) 3

Number of Promises (p) 4

Accordingly the indices for the concerned case can be formulated as follows:

Competitive Index = Hard Statement / Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 36 % Cooperative Index= Soft Statements/ Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 64 % As the above account shows, the value of the cooperative index is found to be higher than the competitive index. Therefore, it can be concluded that the process of the concerned case is mostly characterized by cooperative (soft) behavior rather than competitive (hard) behavior.

4.2.5 Case 5 “Give me what I want or I’ll go!”

The coded statements of the second negotiation case are illustrated in Appendix G. As the Table 4-6 presents during the negotiation process Osman Güven and the credit manager of A Bank applied commitments 5 times and threats 3 times. On the other hand, the parties accommodated 2 times and made promise 1 time. Therefore, the total number of the hard statements (commitments and threats), is 8. The total number of the soft statements (accommodations and promises) on the other hand, is 3.

Table 4-6: Number of Hard and Soft Statements of Case 5

Number of Commitments (c) 5

Number of Threats 3

Numbers of Accommodations (a) 2

Number of Promises (p) 1

Accordingly the indices for the concerned case can be formulated as follows:

Competitive Index = Hard Statement / Hard Statement + Soft Statement =73 % Cooperative Index= Soft Statements/ Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 27 % As demonstrated above, the value of the competitive index is found to be higher than the cooperative index. Therefore, it can be concluded that the process of the concerned case is mostly characterized by competitive (hard) behavior rather than cooperative (soft) behavior.

4.2.6 Case 6 “Fate of the apartments”

The coded statements of the second negotiation case are illustrated in Appendix H. As the Table 4-6 presents during the negotiation process Ali Özbudun and the credit manager of F Bank applied commitments 6 times and threats 1 times. On the other hand, the parties accommodated merely once, and no promise was given during the process. Therefore, the total number of the hard statements (commitments and threats), is 7. The total number of the soft statements (accommodations and promises) on the other hand, is 1.

Table 4-7: Number of Hard and Soft Statements of Case 6

Number of Commitments (c) 6

Number of Threats 1

Numbers of Accommodations (a) 1

Number of Promises (p) -

Accordingly the indices for the concerned case can be formulated as follows:

Competitive Index = Hard Statement / Hard Statement + Soft Statement =88 % Cooperative Index= Soft Statements/ Hard Statement + Soft Statement = 12 % As the above account illustrates, the value of the competitive index is found to be much higher than the cooperative index. It should be here noted that the difference between the two indices is relatively higher compared to other cases. Therefore, it can be concluded that the process of the concerned case is profoundly characterized by competitive (hard) behavior rather than cooperative (soft) behavior.

Table 4-8 summarizes the findings of process analysis of 6 negotiation cases.