Negotiation at Work Doesn't Mean Leaving Faith at the Door — Nashville Institute for Faith and Work

As a professional focused on integrating faith into a Christian’s work, I am often asked do and don’t questions: “Should I check email on Sunday?” “Should I fire a non-performing employee or give him another chance?” “Do I pay the market wage for the position even if it is below a livable wage?“ Sometimes answers are black and white, but most often they are not. My mentor Katherine Leary Alsdorf once told me that she shies away from “ethics” questions worrying that checklists pay homage to the checkbox Christian pharisaical behavior rather than the great matters of the heart underlying the questions. And I agree, with the great matter being “Do we love God with all our heart, soul, and strength, and do we love our neighbor as ourselves?”

But that being said, I do think we can examine both the ethics and the heart simultaneously around negotiations.

Ethics

Scripturally speaking, to negotiate, or “to confer with another so as to arrive at the settlement of some matter” (Merriam Webster) is an ethically neutral act, and several instances of negotiation exist in Scripture (e.g. Abraham for Sarah’s burial plot). The art of give and take with gains and losses can be, at its best, a transparent and efficient process to redistribute resources to symbiotically meet mutual needs. At its worst, a way to transact, extort, and seek advantage through lack of transparency or dishonesty.

Those who follow the Christian faith can use a fundamental negotiation principal. The overwhelmingly simple yet complex commandment from Jesus: Love your neighbor as yourself.

This second commandment from Jesus is a lovely balance of power. It does not say “Love your neighbor.” Rather it includes neighbor and self; both of your interests matter. Interestingly focusing on all parties’ underlying interests, rather than just their position is also consistent with widely accepted negotiation theory. Per Nashville attorney, Mark Donnell, “the point at which those interests may overlap is the fertile ground for resolution.” Further, Donnell highlights that focusing on interests rather than outcomes reduces the temptation for dishonesty or negative focus against the opposing party.

As well, Scripture says to give to Caesar what is Caesar’s as well as offers the parable of talents. We all have authorities over us - managers, boards of directors, and investors for instance. And we should work with excellence to steward the legalities, responsibilities, and resources that come from our authorities. Per Donnell, “We don't always control the positions our jobs ask us to take in negotiations. As a lawyer, I must advocate my clients' positions. So I may be asked and even required to take positions that I personally think are overreaching, unfair, or harsh. In those situations, the approach to the other party is key, even if the position is firm. I seek ways to be kind while simultaneously committed to my parties’ interests.”

In putting together our responsibility to care for the interest of all parties while also honoring our authorities, things can get grey:

Is it appropriate to use the common practice of stating a “final” price which you know really is not “final”?
Should you use the advantage of information inconsistencies between parties for personal gain?
Are you required to get the best possible outcome for your organization when you can tolerate a lower one and the other party cannot?
Do you withdraw from a negotiation if your “authority” requires a position with which you do not agree?

Interestingly, US contract law addresses many of these questions in the concept of “Good Faith Negotiations” which seem grounded in the root of the command to love one’s neighbor.

Per an article on the Harvard Law website,

“In U.S. contract law, the concept of good faith negotiation is rooted in the legal concept of ‘implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing,’ which arose...to protect parties from taking advantage of one another.... In 1933, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that every legal contract contains an ‘implied covenant that neither party shall do anything, which will have the effect of destroying or injuring the right of the other party, to receive the fruits of the contract.’ The implied covenant ...was eventually incorporated into the Uniform Commercial Code and codified by the American Law Institute. In current business negotiations, to negotiate in good faith means to deal honestly and fairly with one another so that each party will receive the benefits of your negotiated contract….(and) must desire to reach agreement and commit to meeting deal terms.”

So what kinds of practices would suggest “bad faith” negotiations?

Engaging in negotiation with no intent for a positive outcome but rather, only to use the offer to leverage another offer, to gain public show, or to gain privileged competitive information.

Using deception of any kind.
Sharing contracts/information between parties without their consent

Heart

Any question of ethical dos and don’ts also comes with a heart issue - what prevents us from loving God with our full heart, soul, and strength? Our idols. And where can idols often rear their heads? Our work. So as we consider negotiation postures, a great starting point is analyzing where our personal idols could cause ethical blind spots and temptations for us. What does “winning” this negotiation do for you? Affirmation? Status? Promotion? Wealth? And what if Jesus asked you to walk away from that? Ethics checklists can be dangerous and serve as “workarounds” from loving God; remember the rich young ruler looked to satisfy his righteousness with his actions yet was unwilling to part from his wealth to love God.

The Theology of Work project offers a fantastic case example of Jack van Hartesvelt, a professional working to negotiate more lovingly in the context of a large organization.

As you enter a negotiation, consider these principles partially taken from the Harvard Law website and expanded with Christocentric postures to help guide your head and heart.

“Reciprocity: Would I want others to treat me or someone close to me this way?” How does this apply to the command to love your neighbor as yourself?
“Publicity: Would I be comfortable if my actions were fully and fairly described in the newspaper?” Would I be comfortable if my actions were fully and fairly described to Jesus?
“Trusted friend: Would I be comfortable telling my best friend, spouse, or children what I am doing?”
“Universality: Would I advise anyone else in my situation to act this way?”
“Legacy: Does this action reflect how I want to be known and remembered?” Does this action point to the Kingdom of God?

And as that negotiation intensifies, remember, we can only serve one Master. Which will you choose?