This past semester at James Madison, I took a class called "Negotiation and Conflict Resolution." It was no doubt one of my favorite classes I've ever taken and there were so many topics we covered that are applicable to every day life. While I am far from being an expert negotiator and am not an insider to everything going on in the MLB COVID-19 season talks, I thought it would be useful to shed some light on the situation and apply what I have learned to better understand the current state of the league.
The Dilemma
From afar, Major League Baseball and the MLB Player's Association could not seem too much further apart in their talks to have a season in 2020. The owners proposed additional salary cuts to the players union, claiming that in order for there to be a season, players will need to take significant salary cuts.
Jeff Passan's first tweet below shows how much players can expect to earn this season under the proposed plan compared to their original salary. The second tweet shows how much the players expected to make based on the prorated 82-game schedule deal that was accepted back in March.
While there are many issues, I would say that the biggest hurdle to get around is the players having accepted a deal already. From the player's perspective, they feel they should not have to take additional cuts because they already made a deal. The biggest issue stemming from that is that the owners seem to be unwilling to present their balance sheets to prove they are in fact going to lose money should there be fully prorated salaries. Max Scherzer put out this tweet yesterday, essentially saying the players will not make concessions on the agreed deal from March, unless the owners are willing to share their balance sheets to prove how much they are losing. And even still, the argument can be made that players should not have to share the losses of this season since they do not share the gains in years of growth.
So like I said, it seems like the two sides could not be further apart, with a soft deadline of June 1st looming. Having said that, we need to keep in mind that this is a negotiation. The MLB and its owners did not expect the players to just say "oh yeah that works for us let's start the season." The owners set an extreme anchor.
Player vs. Owner Objectives
Below is a mock "objectives" sheet. The public has imperfect information, but based on what has been reported, we have a general idea of each sides "Target."
Keep in mind this is just a hypothetical chart based on what I feel is possibly the current sentiment. The green-shaded area between the intention points is known as the "Acceptance Zone." In the above chart, this would be considered a "Negative Acceptance Zone" because the player's intention point is higher than the owners. This does not necessarily mean a deal cannot be reached, but it is not as ideal as having a positive acceptance zone, where the players intention point would be lower than the owners intention point. The blue-shaded regions plus the green-shaded region would be considered the "Bargaining Zone." In this case, there is a "Positive Bargaining Zone," meaning that the players' resistance point is lower than the owners' resistance point.
It's quite possible that there is a "Negative Bargaining Zone," where the players' resistance point is higher than the owners' resistance point. This is what "No Season" looks like...
Negotiation Strategies to Get it Done
There does not seem to be much collaboration going on right now, at least from my point of view, and maybe that's justified. But what exactly is taking place? And is it the ideal strategy?
Below are alternatives to a negotiated agreement. I did this based on the players' perspective because we really do not get much reaction or comment ever from the ownership side. The idea here is that if the two parties are not able to collaboratively negotiate a deal, the players can take an alternative approach to reach an agreement. Once again, keep in mind that I am making up these actions and values, they are just examples and they do not reflect reality.
The higher the expected utility (Value(1) * Probability(1) + Value(2) * Probability(2)=Exp. Util.), the better. In this example, I believe the players best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) would be "Deferral." This is essentially what Scherzer stated the players would do in his tweet from above. Their worst alternative (WATNA) would be to surrender. While this is good in theory, I did not consider the fact that MLB is on a deadline while creating the values and deferral is time sensitive, especially this year.
Never Split The Difference
I would highly recommend the book "Never Split the Difference" by Chris Voss. Voss is a former FBI hostage negotiator and talks about various ways to implement his tactics into our lives.
I mentioned the term before, but Voss uses "extreme anchors" to set the tone of a negotiation, while also understanding how unlikely it is to get an immediate "yes." That's exactly what the owners have done.
Something else discussed in the book that is applicable here is the power of "No," and how that can actually a good thing to hear during a negotiation. Voss stresses the need to hear that word alternatively, as a way to understand "why." He hears "no" as "I am not yet ready to agree," "I don't think I can afford it," and "I need more information." All of those are applicable to baseball right now. Voss even talks about how "yes" can be a bad thing, as it is often counterfeit if used too soon. I would say that the players' quick acceptance of the prorated salaries deal in March was a premature "yes," but the owners had to make that offer in the first place.
Another tactic that I believe could apply right now is tactical empathy. An example of this would be the MLBPA adopting the mindset and feelings of the owners to increase influence. Something like "Mr. Owner, we understand how much of a toll having no ticket sales is going to be, and how difficult this situation is on everyone economically. But, we have not shared profits when they exceed expectations in the past, and we only have x amount of years left to make up for these losses while your "ownership career" is limited to life."
Lastly, human behavior should play a major role in these negotiations. Each respective side needs to make their counterpart realize how much more there is to lose from no season at all. People are nearly always willing to take more risks to avoid losses than to realize a gain.
Comments