Epistemological Analysis of the Negotiation Process

The article examines negotiations as dialogues concerning conflicting interests among participants. It argues that negotiations represent the primary and most socially significant type of dialogue. This is evidenced by the disproportionate volume of research dedicated to negotiations compared to other forms of dialogue, as well as the multidisciplinary approach to their study. The purpose of the article is to investigate negotiations through the lens of epistemology, one of the disciplines involved in their analysis. The author contends that negotiations are epistemological processes governed by epistemological principles. To elucidate these principles, the article explicates key categories serving as research instruments, primarily focusing on the concepts of “negotiation” and “interest.” The relationship between “interest” and related concepts such as “desire,” “need,” and “benefit” is explored. There are two types of dialogue: those concerning the veracity of descriptions and those focused on the rationality of prescriptions. The article elucidates the distinct nature of negotiations as dialogues about prescriptions. The article also underscores the importance of the categories of “research” and “communication” in understanding the nature of negotiations. Since negotiations are fundamentally a form of communication, the examination of conflicting interests and the search for solutions to these conflicts do not fall within the negotiation process itself. These tasks are addressed prior to negotiations, during the research phase. The purpose of negotiations is to discuss and either accept or reject the outcomes of these preliminary investigations, particularly pre-drafted agreements on resolving conflicts of interest. Based on this framework, the article explores the epistemological mechanisms underlying negotiations related to the division, consolidation, and exchange of benefits. Additionally, the Harvard Negotiation Program, which seeks to transform negotiations from a confrontation of positions into a collaborative search for a shared solution, is subjected to epistemological analysis. The role of empathy in facilitating this transformation is also discussed. In conclusion, it is argued that an epistemological analysis of negotiations not only deepens our understanding of their nature as a distinct form of communication but also offers tools for enhancing negotiation practices, promoting the resolution of conflicts of divergent interests in various social conflicts without resorting to physical confrontation.

1. Andreev V.I. (1995) Conflictology: The Art of Dispute, Negotiation, Conflict Resolution. Moscow: Narodnoe obrazovanie (in Russian).

2. Bellenger L. (2003) Negotiations. Saint Petersburg: Neva (Russian translation).

3. Carnegie D. (1989) Public Speaking and Influencing Men in Business. Moscow: Progress (Russian translation).

4. Cornelius H. & Faire S. (1992) Everyone Can Win: How to Resolve Conflicts. Moscow: Stringer (Russian translation).

5. Davydov A.P. (2023) Individualism and Collectivism as a Subject of Social-Philosophical Analysis (Reflections on the Eve of the Scientific Conference “Individualization and Collectivism in Contemporary Russian Society”). Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 140–159 (in Russian).

6. Erbacher C.E. (2018) Grundzüge der Verhandlungsführung (4th ed.). Zurich: vdf Hochschulverlag (in German).

7. Fisher R. & Ertel D. (1996) Getting Ready to Negotiate. Moscow: Filin (Russian translation).

8. Fisher R. & Ury W. (1990) Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Moscow: Nauka (Russian translation).

9. Gates S. (2020) The Negotiation Book: Your Definitive Guide to Successful Negotiating (M. Khoroshilova, Trans.). Moscow: Eksmo (Russian translation).

10. Karmin A.S. (Ed.) (1999) Conflictology. Saint Petersburg: Lan’ (in Russian).

11. Kennedy G. (2013) Negotiation: The Complete Course. Moscow: Alpina Publisher (Russian translation).

12. Levin G.D. (2005) Dialogue: Epistemological Mechanism and Humanitarian Function. In: Lektorsky V.A. (Ed.) Science Through the Eyes of a Humanist (pp. 262–287). Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya (in Russian).

13. Levin G.D. (2012) Dialogue as a Form of Communication. In: Levin G.D. & Trufanova E.O. (Eds.) Philosophy of Science. Issue 17: Epistemological Analysis of Communication (pp. 228–239). Moscow: RAS Institute of Philosophy (in Russian).

14. Malhotra D. & Bazerman M.H. (2021) Negotiation Genius. Moscow: Intellektualnaya literatura (Russian translation).

15. Popper K. (1983) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Moscow: Progress (Russian translation).

16. Povarnin S.I. (1996) Dispute. On the Theory and Practice of Dispute. Saint Petersburg: Lan’ (in Russian).

17. Rogers C. (1984) Empathy. In: Vilyunas V.K. & Gippenreyter Yu.B. (Eds.) Psychology of Emotions. Texts (pp. 229–241). Moscow: Moscow University Press (Russian translation).

18. Shell R. (2020) Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People (A. Yadykin, Trans.). Moscow: Alpina Publisher (Russian translation).

19. Ury W. (1993) Getting Past No: Negotiating with Difficult People (S.A. Chakovsky, Trans.). Moscow: Nauka (Russian translation).