INTRODUCTION
In preparing for negotiation, the key is to identify the other person's potential sources of power, which can come from knowledge, competition, performance and reputation” (Braff 1996). Reputation of a negotiator is significant; it remains one of the most under researched aspects of the negotiation process. This may be due to the tendency for most negotiation research to be conducted in controlled environment or laboratory settings which bring strangers together to negotiate and it is assumed that the parties do not know each other and so bring no reputation to the transaction. Reputation is important in negotiation because it helps the other party predict moves of opponent. The concept of trust can play a critical role in the success of a negotiation. If a negotiator has a reputation of being trustworthy, it allows opponents to believe that the negotiator will act in accordance to past performances. Large number of researches shows that reputation has a positive effect on the outcome of negotiation.
Purpose of this paper is to extend the current understanding by presenting a model that explains the development process of reputation in negotiation. Model has been developed that explain how reputation is formed in a negotiation. Only one model has been discussed previously regarding formation of reputation in negotiation which was silent regarding elements that manage negotiation process in order to construct reputation of negotiator.
Effort has been made to develop a model that shows power of the actions of negotiator before and during the negotiation to create a reputation that is formed by the perceptions of the other party. Negotiator omits signals and contexts which results into creation of image by opponent b...
... middle of paper ...
... in negotiations. It is also known that a trustworthy reputation can facilitate the process to create trust with the other party. But beyond these findings, little is known specifically about how a negotiator constructs his or her reputation.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This is a theoretical paper and model has been developed on the bases of extant research. Three key elements trust, justice and relationship have been added which is new to the existing literature. On the bases of extensive literature, our deep analysis and interviews from practicing negotiators revealed that these three elements play a significant role in building of reputation in negotiation context. In the next section, we focus on the process of how a negotiator can create a reputation. The model (figure one) has been developed on the bases of extant research available on reputation in negotiation.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises and cases
Hames, D. (2011). Negotiation: Closing Deals, Settling Disputes, and Making Team Decisions. Sage Publications. Retrieved 08 25, 2013
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2011). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. ISBN-13: 9780073530369
Negotiations are supposed to begin in a positive way in which the negotiators consider the needs and wants of the others involved and their shared interests and interdependencies.... ... middle of paper ... ... References Michael R. Carrell, C. H. (2008). Negotiating Essentials: Theory, Skills, and Practice.
Negotiations styles are scholastically recognized as being broken down into two general categories and those are distributive bargaining styles and integrative negotiation styles. Distributive bargaining styles of negotiation are understood to be a competitive type of negotiation. “Distributive bargaining, also known as positional bargaining, negotiating zero-sum, competitive negotiation, or win-lose negotiation, is a type or style of negotiation in which the parties compete for the distribution of a fixed amount of value” (Business Blog Reviews, 2011). This type of negotiation skill or style approach might be best represented in professional areas such as the stock market where there is a fixed goal in mind or even in a garage sale negotiation where the owner would have a specific value of which he/she would not go below. In contrast, an integrative negotiation approach/style is that of cooperative bargaining, or win-win types ...
Since these subjects go well together, it is easy to see that people are not only terrible negotiators, but also terrible communicators in general. It will not always be the case that a bad negotiator is a bad communicator, but the skills required for both of these subjects are extremely similar. Crucial Conversations took a lot of concepts discussed in negotiation and put them into every day dialogue. The idea of a long-term relationship can really be determined by one conversation you have with someone, whether it is a negotiation or a simple talk over what you think about a football team. A lot of the concepts taught require a lot of confidence; telling your CEO boss that he is wrong is not easy because of his intimidating title, but with the right content and dialogue; the end result will benefit you the most vs. not saying anything.
The first common theme is the importance of clear strategic intent and big picture thinking in negotiations. Before taking the Negotiation Behaviour unit, I always perceived negotiation as a fixed-pie, a zero-sum gain situation, where one party wins and the other party loses. This belief has often led me to a competitive behaviour in negotiation by trading the big picture thinking with the need to win, getting too detailed too quickly, leading to a positional approach instead of having a broad goal and explore for ways around problems to create value and get the best outcome.
Employees, investors, suppliers and customers alike eventually reach a decision point in a relationship when they decide where to place their trust and with whom. Leaders are judged on what they do to win trust, and the sincerity and consistency of their effort to retain it. Leaders win trust by communicating openly and often, having a clear and committed communications policy, strategy and processes, initiating formal and informal communications programs and regularly assessing their own communications effectiveness and that of their team and their organization.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2006). Negotiation: Readings, Exercises and Cases (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Negotiating styles are grouped into five types; Competing, Collaborating, Comprising, Avoidance, and Accommodating (Colburn, 2010). Even though it is possible to exhibit different parts of the five types of negation styles in different situations, can see that my tendencies seem to default to, Compromise and Accommodating. In reviewing the course work and reviewing my answers for Questionnaire 1 and 5, I find that the data reflects the same assumption. The accommodating profile is one where relationship perseveration is everything and giving what the other side wants is the route to winning people over. Accommodators are well liked by their colleagues and opposite party negotiators (Colburn, 2010). When analyzing my accommodating tenancy in negations, I find often it is easier to give into the demands when they are within a reasonable range. I often consider it the part of providing a high level of customer service. It has been my experience that continued delaying and not coming to an agreement in a topic will only shorten the window in which you will have to meet the request since. The cons to this style are by accommodating highly competitive styles the accommodator can give up to much ground in the process. “Giving away value too easily too early can signal to your negotiation counterpart that you've very deep pockets, and your gift is just a taster of bigger and better gifts to come”. The other negations type I default to is compromising. Compromising “often involves splitting the difference; usually resulting in an end position of about half way between both parties’ opening positions” (Colburn, 2010). In the absence of a good rationale or balanced exchanged concessions, half way betwee...
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY
During this course, I have learned a lot about negotiating. We learned about almost every negotiating technique there is. We learned about cross-cultural negotiations, body language, Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA), variables in negotiating, and many more. Before this course, I did not know that much about negotiating. I thought that negotiating was just about trading or convincing someone to give you what you want and you did not care about the other side, resulting in a win-lose. I now know that negotiating is about getting what you want, but also giving the other side what they want as well to result in a win-win. This paper is about how I am going to improve my negotiating skills over the next six months. In order for me to improve my negotiating skills, I believe I need to improve the following skills- my body language, communication, planning, and my interpersonal communications. By improving those skills, I can become an effective negotiator.
The topic for my real world negotiation is to come to an agreement with my supervisor for a promotion as well as an increased salary. I currently work as a student assistant at the student services Planning, Enrollment Management, and Student Affairs (PEMSA) department. My goal is to increase my hourly pay from $10.15 to $12.70, a 25% increase. Having worked in this department for three years, I have taken on tasks not part of my job description such as processing return mail, data entry, and supervision.
Zhang, Jian-Dong; Liu, Leigh Anne; Liu, Wu. “Trust and Decption in Negotiation: Culturally Divergent Effects.” Management and Organization Review, [early view].
Negotiation approaches are generally described as either distributive or integrative. At the heart of each strategy is a measurement of conflict between each party’s desired outcomes. Consider the following situation. Chris, an entrepreneur, is starting a new business that will occupy most of his free time for the near future. Living in a fancy new development, Chris is concerned that his new business will prevent him from taking care of his lawn, which has strict requirements under neighborhood rules. Not wanted to upset his neighbors, Chris decides to hire Matt to cut his grass.