Jonathan R. Cohen, Outer Ideas on Inner Dialogues<\/a><\/p>\nSymposium 2010 Recap<\/h4>\n
By<\/em> A. Robert Dawes<\/span><\/p>\nThrough the course of a normal week in your life, with whom do you negotiate most often?<\/span><\/p>\nYou may negotiate with your roommate or significant other for the remote control, your friends and family over the time and attention you\u2019ll be devoting to each of them, and even negotiate with your cat over the available real estate on your desk or in your lap.\u00a0 But upon reflection, you may also find that the person you negotiate with most often in daily life is actually yourself.<\/span><\/p>\nThat was the point of departure for Erica Ariel Fox (HLS \u201995) at Saturday\u2019s Harvard Negotiation Law Review symposium.\u00a0 HNLR, the law school\u2019s student-run negotiation and alternative dispute resolution journal, hosts a symposium every other year in which experts convene to discuss a topic related to ADR or negotiation.\u00a0 This year, as the first panel sat down to kick off Saturday morning\u2019s symposium, many attendees were not sure exactly what was meant by the title, The Negotiation Within.<\/span><\/p>\nWhile HNLR symposia in previous years have mostly involved strategies for and theories about negotiating with other parties, this year\u2019s discussion examined the interplay of negotiation theory and conflict within oneself.\u00a0 Through this inquiry, we might be able to apply conflict resolution strategies to help resolve the tension of an inner debate, for instance, or examine the ways in which negotiations within a person or an entity affect that conflicted party\u2019s external negotiations with other parties.<\/span><\/p>\nRobert C. Bordone (HLS \u201997), Director of the Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program at HLS, illustrated the concept by posing a hypothetical situation to the first panel: imagine a CEO who is about to be bought out of the company he founded.\u00a0 At the last minute, he makes a lengthy list of new demands, effectively killing the deal.\u00a0 As the buyout was being finalized, his inner negotiation involved many parties, for which Leonard L. Riskin utilized the term \u201csub-personalities.\u201d\u00a0 Among these sub-personalities might have been the CEO\u2019s family, his employees, his community, as well as his own \u201cCEO\u201d mentality which wasn\u2019t quite ready to let go of the reins of his company.<\/span><\/p>\nWho wins among these conflicting interests within an \u201cindividual\u201d?\u00a0 Who decides among them, and how?\u00a0 In the context of an internal negotiation, Riskin and David Hoffman (HLS \u201984) discussed some attributes of the ideal, fully aware, calm self, likening them to those of a successful mediator.\u00a0 Specifically, the argument goes, mindfulness – the Buddhist ideal of complete, attentive awareness – can be used to improve and streamline our inner negotiations in the same way that an attentive mediator can among multiple parties.\u00a0 And concomitantly, we can enhance our success in external negotiations with counterparties by clearing away ambiguities in our own interests.<\/span><\/p>\nStill, we are quite limited in this endeavor.\u00a0 Bruce Patton (HLS \u201984) and Sheila Heen (HLS \u201993) discussed the processes and constraints of the human mind in navigating the negotiation within.\u00a0 In a bold attempt to diagram the processes, Heen mapped many factors involved in an internal negotiation, including social context, perceptions, neuroscientific phenomena (such as so-called \u201cmirror neurons\u201d and other neurochemical processes), alongside one\u2019s spiritual values and experience.\u00a0 \u201cWho we are is a negotiation from beginning to end,\u201d Patton explained.\u00a0 \u201cIt doesn\u2019t stop.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\nLater, a panel on \u201cpractical implications\u201d looked at the outward signals of these inner conflicts.\u00a0 Clark Freshman discussed physical manifestations of distress, attraction, happiness, and other feelings, and demonstrated the power that comes with being able to identify them in others.\u00a0 Monica Meehan McNamara analyzed the interplay between one\u2019s posture and the \u201cchoreography of internal voices.\u201d\u00a0 While acknowledging the benefits of reading the body language of others, she also touched on the dangers that can arise when we understand it to be a judgment about ourselves.\u00a0 But \u201cif we assume that [another person\u2019s] reaction shows us a version of our truth,\u201d she explained, \u201cit is probably because some voice or truth is being invoked in us.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\nDiscussing current thought and research in the field, Ran Kuttner described a \u201cwave\u201d-like interaction in which communication flows to such an extent that it is \u201chard to tell where your thought ends and mine begins.\u201d\u00a0 Highlighting another form of effective communication, Michael Wheeler (HLS \u201974) emphasized the power of symbolic imagery to convey one\u2019s complex web of competing feelings, and took a stand for legitimizing \u201caction research\u201d – reflections from practitioners\u2019 experience in the field.<\/span><\/p>\nThe symposium closed with a debate about the future of legal academia and pedagogy, with speakers struggling to determine the extent to which the community should retain standards favoring work utilizing scientific methods or lengthy citations over \u201caction research.\u201d\u00a0 Bordone agreed that \u201cthere is a lot to be learned from experience and reflection,\u201d but wondered about the constraints imposed by tradition.\u00a0 Capping off the discussion, Riskin proposed a middle way: \u201cYou can be daring,\u201d he said, \u201cas long as you\u2019re thoughtful and rigorous and analytical.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\nHNLR\u2019s 2010 symposium was all of these things, and left attendees to ponder the significance of their own semi-private negotiations within.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\nOriginally published to HNLR Online on March 6, 2010.<\/em><\/p>\nVideos of the symposium panels are available for streaming here:<\/p>\n
Panel 1:
\u00a0
![\"HNLR](\"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/91\/2010\/01\/symposium-poster-website_post3.jpg\" "\\"HNLR")
<\/em><\/p>\n