{"id":235475,"date":"2020-07-21T12:42:29","date_gmt":"2020-07-21T12:42:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/get-mails.com\/?p=235475"},"modified":"2020-07-21T12:42:29","modified_gmt":"2020-07-21T12:42:29","slug":"comment-negocier-par-email","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/get-mails.com\/en\/comment-negocier-par-email\/","title":{"rendered":"How to negotiate by email?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\"Homme<\/div>
\n

If you know how, e-mail negotiations can work in your favor.<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

According to Adobe Email usage study 2019,<\/a> the average American spends more than a third of an office worker's average day on his or her e-mail inbox.<\/p>\n

Of course, many of these hours are devoted to negotiations, even if these are brief and take place on both sides.<\/p>\n

And that raises an interesting question:<\/p>\n

Are e-mail negotiations effective? And, if they are ... couldn't you save yourself a ton of travel expenses by taking advantage of the already ingrained messaging habit?<\/p>\n

Is it possible that negotiating by e-mail is even more effective than face-to-face?<\/p>\n

Let's talk about it.<\/p>\n

The disadvantage of e-mail negotiations<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n
\"Femme<\/div>
\n

The \"burning bias\" leads to fierce email battles that would never have occurred in a … [+]<\/span> face-to-face interaction.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

While there's no doubt that negotiations by e-mail would save negotiators time and money, there are obstacles to overcome.<\/p>\n

Emails tend to be more aggressive and self-serving. People have reduced sense of social obligation<\/a> in e-mail interactions and humor is eroded or misinterpreted. E-mail does not require courtesy rituals (the small talk that precedes face-to-face negotiations), and this paves the way for less trust.<\/p>\n

The phenomenon of \"fire bias\" makes inflammatory comments and remarks eight times more likely in e-mails than in face-to-face interactions.<\/p>\n

Other biases Negotiations by e-mail<\/a>The most common type of e-mail negotiation, including the sinister attribution bias: the tendency of electronic communicators to attribute bad intentions to people they don't know. E-mail negotiators are you are more likely to suspect that the other party is lying<\/a>even if there is no factual basis,<\/p>\n

Visual anonymity and distance reduce the likelihood of negotiating loyalty (continuation rule<\/a>), making it more likely that negotiators will abandon the current negotiation. This means that e-mail negotiations have a higher incidence of deadlock.<\/p>\n

We're less able to convey our emotions by e-mail than we think. One study showed<\/a> Two trained data coders, who independently studied the same transcripts of email negotiations, agreed on the emotions (empathy, shame, anger, interest and contempt) that participants expressed only about 22% of the time.<\/p>\n

People are more likely to lie<\/a> by e-mail than with pen and paper. This seems particularly odd, as digital documents can be even more available for retrieval than paper ones; however, people feel morally disconnected.<\/p>\n

For busy negotiators, it's much easier to ignore an e-mail than to withdraw when approached personally. What's more, the time it takes to complete a task is longer in e-mails than in face-to-face interactions, probably because people talk much faster than they write.<\/p>\n

All in all, the research tells us that negotiations by e-mail are embarrassed by<\/a> Fewer comments, minimized social signals, excessively long e-mails and a tendency to anger.<\/p>\n

However, none of this means that e-mail negotiations should never be considered. Because, in fact, e-mail negotiations do have potential advantages.<\/p>\n

Status equalization and other advantages of e-mail negotiations<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n
\"Asseyez-vous<\/div>
\n

Negotiating by e-mail has a number of advantages, if you know how to take advantage of them!<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

There's an \"other side of the coin\" view of e-mail negotiations. While previous studies seem dire, there are others that offer hope.<\/p>\n

Here are just a few of them:<\/p>\n

Negotiators who had never met were invited to take a brief telephone call. schmoozing<\/a> before starting the negotiation by email only. The simple fact of discussing and exchanging information unrelated to the task in hand (they were forbidden to talk about negotiation) created a good relationship. Attitudes changed. Negotiators were less competitive and more cooperative. Trust developed and higher joint gains were achieved.<\/p>\n

Firstly, and secondly, a pre-exchange phone call can enhance the taste and the relationship, resulting in in more profitable businesses<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Then consider that just a speech<\/a> in small group meetings:<\/p>\n