Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
negotiation theory - essay
distributive or integrative negotiation strategy
Pros and cons of negotiation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: negotiation theory - essay
The Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA) is a negotiation theory that refers to a course of action one plans to partake in the occurrence of breakdown of a negotiation process or a solution to a negotiation process if not reached. The concept first coined into being by Ury and Rogeris perceived to be the key to successful negotiators (Fisher, 1991). Importance on BATNA is based on the facilitation of options to a negotiation. They are thus deemed to be the edge one gains thus diminishing considerably the risk of accepting unfavourable terms in an agreement. It also creates a platform to influence one from leaving favourable terms which would otherwise have been sacrificed due to underlying factors. In practise, an offer better than the BANTA leads to one drawing up an agreement, whereas as if it is less promising, then you have the option of either restarting negotiations or withdrawing from them. Related to BATNA is a WATNA, the Worst Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement, a concept aimed at reducing the risk of one being too realistic during a negotiation process. It has the purpose of assisting one in developing the worst scenario in a negotiation (Notini, 2005). Thus the two concepts work hand in hand. In a negotiation process, amongst other principle, one needs to have in view the best and worst outcomes of the process if they have intent to come out with the best agreement. This is because they both will facilitate him or her know when to or not to settle. The parties in this deal are however diverse. It has the two principle negotiators, Walter and Wanda. In the scenario between Walter and Wanda diverging interests are at play. For Walter he aims at buying a car that best suits his needs, for Wanda, her prim... ... middle of paper ... ... that the parties understand that the arbitration was binding and would be decided on a degree of equity. Works Cited Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991).Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. (B. Patton, Ed.) Business (Vol. 11, pp. 1-90).Penguin Books. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21322851 Kleine, M., &Risse, T. (2010).Deliberation in negotiations.Journal of European Public Policy, 17(5), 708-726. Routledge. Retrieved from http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/routledge/13501763.html Notini, J. (2005). Effective Alternatives Analysis in Mediation: BANTA/WATNA Analysis demystified. Retrieved from http://www.mediate.com/articles/notini1.cfm Simkin, W. E. (1971). Mediation and the Dynamics of Collective Bargaining. Silivan, A., &Sheffrin, S. M. (2003).Economics: Principles in action (p.474). Pearson Prentice Hall.
Negotiations are a part of daily life whether we are aware of them occurring or not. In everything that we do there are preferred end results and the end results are likely to affect more than one person. The goal in this however, is to ensure that all parties are equally benefited from the actions and reactions that occur to create that end result. While some dealings are done in a more subtle manner without a great deal of negotiation per say there are other situations that would warrant more vocalized mutually acceptable compromises. The purpose of this paper will be to effectively explain a situation of which required negotiation on the part of both parties that almost all of us have endured and that would be the process of buying a vehicle.
Negotiation is a fundamental form of dispute resolution involving two or more parties (REF1). Negotiations can also take place in order to avoid any future disputes. It can be either an interpersonal or inter-group process. Negotiations can occur at international or corporate level and also at a personal level. Negotiations often involve give and take acknowledging that there is interdependence between the disputants to some extent to achieve the goal. This means that negotiations only arise when the goals cannot be achieved independently [2]. Interdependence means the both parties can influence the outcome for the other party and vice versa. The negotiations can be win-lose or win-win in nature. The disputant will either try to force the other parties to conform to their demands or try to formulate a solution which satisfies both parties. The nature of their relationship during the negotiation is linked to the nature of their interdependence, the way negotiations are piloted and the final outcomes for the disputants [3]. Effective negotiators try to comprehend the ways in which other disputants may alter or readjust their positions during the whole process. This is comprehended by looking at how other disputants alter their positions during previous negotiations. Negotiations also involve a desired amount of information exchange and try to influence the other disputant’s outcome. This process of give and take is necessary to achieve a favourable agreement. Disputants usually will not want to cooperate if they sense a lack of willingness to compromise from the other party’s side.
Fisher and Ury explain that a good agreement is one which is wise and efficient, and which improves the parties' relationship. Wise agreements satisfy the parties' interests and are fair and lasting. The authors' goal is to develop a method for reaching good agreements. Negotiations often take the form of positional bargaining. In positional bargaining each part opens with their position on an issue. The parties then bargain from their separate opening positions to agree on one position. Haggling over a price is a typical example of positional bargaining. Fisher and Ury argue that positional bargaining does not tend to produce good agreements. It is an inefficient means of reaching agreements, and the agreements tend to neglect the parties' interests. It encourages stubbornness and so tends to harm the parties' relationship. Principled negotiation provides a better way of reaching good agreements. Fisher and Ury develop four principles of negotiation. Their process of principled negotiation can be used effectively on almost any type of dispute. Their four principles are 1) separate the people from the problem; 2) focus on interests rather than positions; 3) generate a variety of options before settling on an agreement; and 4) insist that the agreement be based on objective criteria. [p. 11]
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY
...at the negotiators can increase the possibility of approaching good negotiation outcomes if they have sufficient and careful preparation. Preparation is the key to making a successful negotiator. The management of the negotiation process is constituted by the three primary evaluations toward the negotiators’ themselves, the other parties, and the situation. Each party must identify what they really want in order to build their target point, reservation point, and BATNA. In addition, a good negotiation strategy is to explore the real needs of the other party by asking the right questions and listening actively. A good negotiator knows what information should be open and vice versa. Besides, the negotiator should not only pay attention to the immediate outcomes of the agreement, but also the long term benefits such as prospective collaboration, long term relationship.
For this purpose, it is better guided or adopt certain methods or strategies that can be employed to attaining effective negotiation, a good negotiator should be a person able to function to its full power to leverage all the strengths and opportunities that are presented, and also know the weaknesses and threats, it is necessary or advisable a SWOT analysis with this tool made, you can get great results in a negotiation, since the specific objective which focuses, is that both sides get benefits well,
Lewicki, R.J., Saunders, D.M., Barry B. (2011). Essentials of Negotiation. New York, NY: McGraw Hills Inc.
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D., & Barry, B. (2009). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases. (6th ed.) . New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
It is guilt, anger, legitimacy, fear, whatever gives you power over the other party. I could relate myself to this example in a situation when I tried negotiating with my elder sister for her clothes and toys in my childhood, she always tries to scare me through relationship power because she was elder than me. I always wondered what could be BATNA for negotiator who has less power. I thought of someone with the less power should accept poor agreements and compromise rather than walking away but after reading the materials and also through class discussions when our professor used to explain the concept. For example, when purchasing a car, your BATNA is to simply go to another dealership if negotiations are not in the zone of agreement. I realized that one should never accept poor agreements because it can damage the relationship between the parties and instead one should simply walk
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises and cases
It is aimed to resolve points of difference, to gain advantage for an individual or collective, or to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests. It is often conducted by putting forward a position and making small concessions to achieve an agreement. The degree to which the negotiating parties trust each other to implement the negotiated solution is a major factor in determining whether negotiations are successful. In many cases, negotiation
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2007). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill/ Irwin.
Negotiation is a process in which two individuals or two parties strive to arrive on problems and issue of actions, where there is a conflict in ideas, values, and goals. The primary motive of negotiator is to build credibility. Negotiators often negotiate by shared interests, learning the opposing position and share the information that might persuade the “counterpart” to agree on a agreement that benefit either individual or both the counterparts.
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin
This is one of the most important sources of power in a negotiation (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2011). This step will also save you time and hassle in case the agreement is not reached. Using the example above, if you are expecting to pay no more than $20,000 for the vehicle and the dealership tells you that the best they can do is $23,000, if you have done your homework and planning ahead of time, you know that the dealership down the street might be able to get you the deal you want. If the sales agent and the dealership knows that you can go down the road to get the deal you want, it might push them to come down to your final number instead of them losing the deal. It is always a win-win situation. Another BATNA could be simply going for another vehicle or have less options on the vehicle that you are trying to