Objective Criteria

Definition

Objective criteria are standards or benchmarks used to evaluate options in a negotiation based on factual data, measurable outcomes, or principles of fairness. These criteria help parties reach agreements that are rational, equitable, and justifiable, moving the focus away from personal opinions or biases. By relying on objective criteria, negotiators can foster collaboration and create solutions that satisfy both sides while minimizing conflicts.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Using objective criteria helps reduce emotional conflicts and biases in negotiations, allowing for clearer communication.
2. Objective criteria can include industry standards, legal precedents, market value, or expert opinions that provide a neutral basis for decision-making.
3. When both parties agree to use objective criteria, it creates a collaborative atmosphere, encouraging mutual problem-solving.
4. Negotiators often identify and discuss objective criteria early in the process to set a clear foundation for evaluating options.
5. Applying objective criteria can lead to more sustainable agreements since they are based on agreed-upon standards rather than subjective viewpoints.

Review Questions

• How can objective criteria enhance the negotiation process by minimizing biases?
  • Objective criteria enhance the negotiation process by providing a neutral ground for decision-making that minimizes personal biases and emotional influences. When negotiators use facts and measurable data as benchmarks for evaluating options, it reduces the chances of conflicts arising from differing opinions or subjective judgments. This approach allows both parties to focus on finding solutions that are fair and acceptable based on agreed-upon standards.
• In what ways do objective criteria contribute to creating sustainable agreements between negotiating parties?
  • Objective criteria contribute to creating sustainable agreements by ensuring that decisions are based on common standards that both parties recognize as fair. When negotiations are anchored in factual data or established benchmarks, the resulting agreements tend to be more robust and resilient over time. This reliance on shared criteria fosters trust among parties and promotes ongoing cooperation, making it easier to revisit the agreement in the future if necessary.
• Evaluate how the use of objective criteria can influence the outcomes of alternative dispute resolution methods.
  • The use of objective criteria significantly influences the outcomes of alternative dispute resolution methods by providing a foundation for resolving conflicts fairly. In mediation or arbitration settings, when parties agree to reference objective standards, it helps guide discussions towards constructive resolutions rather than allowing emotions or biases to dictate the process. This reliance on measurable outcomes enhances the credibility of the resolution process and encourages adherence to agreements made, ultimately resulting in more satisfactory outcomes for all involved.

Related terms

BATNA:

Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement; it represents the most advantageous alternative course of action a party can take if negotiations fail.

ZOPA:

Zone of Possible Agreement; the range in which an agreement is satisfactory to both parties involved in a negotiation.

Fairness:

The quality of being impartial and just; in negotiations, it refers to the equitable treatment of all parties involved and adherence to ethical standards.