The Problem
The important distinction between a negotiation and an argument is a successful negotiation should end with mutual agreement. By the end, both party’s relationships should not be severed or damaged in anyway. Efficiency is also very important because no one wants to feel like he or she is wasting his or her time. The longer a negotiation lasts the more of a risk a person will lock in to a position. With any negotiation, the positions will flex and change as the sides reach a compromise. The more a position is set and focused on the less attention will go to the real concerns. There is such a thing as being too aggressive or too friendly when focusing on the position. An even bigger problem occurs when one side is softer than
…show more content…
The Harvard Negotiation Project first thought up this method. It can be broken down into four sections: separate the people from the problem, focus on interests, not positions, invent options for mutual gain, and insist on using objective criteria. Getting the person away from the problem is an important first step because if the negotiation is not focusing on the problem then attacks on a person can happen, which could ruin the relationship. The interests are what are crucial because that is what is at the core of someone’s position. The position is the easy part to focus on but when looking at the interests of both groups there is a higher chance of mutual satisfaction. A third way to help a common gain is to create interests that both sides might agree on while the pressure is low. This way when the negotiation gets going it is easier to build off these ideas. The fourth point focuses on the problem when someone is not willing to budge. If someone brings up objective standards, like an academic article or expert opinion, both sides can use this instead of merely fighting between each …show more content…
No matter what the position is, somebody’s interests are the real reason why they are negotiating. There are always common and opposing interests that a person whittles out from opposite positions. If a side spends time to actively discuss what both groups focus on then it may become clear that there is some common ground. This way, instead of concentrating on an overarching position, the negotiation can steer towards the different desires. Unfortunately delving into the root of the problem is not always easy to do. A way to figure out the interests is to ask why they want the thing they want instead of simply saying, “That will not work.” Furthermore, a person must ask him or her why the other party’s interest is a bad one. More often than not, the root of an interest comes from basic survival needs such as a sense of inclusion, safety, and the ability to control one’s own
Distributive bargaining consists of two parties in competition to maximize their share of a limited resource. In distributive bargaining, the goals of one party are in fundamental and direct conflict with the goals of the other party (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2011). In the negotiation over the job offer at Robust Routers, the resources being distributed were the items in the bargaining mix. As the human resources director, my goal was to gain more by giving less, and Joe’s goal was to gain more by receiving more of the company’s resources.
Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. 2nd ed. New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1991. Print.
Negotiation is a fundamental process used in resolving conflicts, making business deals, and in managing working relationships with others. Negotiations occur for two reasons: (1) to resolve a problem or dispute between parties, or (2) to create something new that neither party could do on its own.
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 ...
Compromise is one of the largest parts of being able to achieve success in a community through individual sacrifice, and being able to compromise is only possible when an individual obtains the willingness to do so. Compromising is considered one of the best, is not the best way of seizing an argument, and there are many arguments that are present in all communities. When an argument reaches the point where neither party will give, it can be best to compromise so that each side is able to gain something, while still sacrificing something for the greater good.
4. "15 Rules of Negotiation — Become A Master Negotiator." Become A Master Negotiator — Sharpen & Strengthen Your Negotiation Skills & Techniques. Everyone Negotiates, 24 May 2012. Web. 11 Feb. 2012.
The first method of principled negotiation is to separate the people from the problem. Although it seems to be quite a simple process, I found a major question came to mind: “What if the people are the problem?”. Being a teenager, I know that sometimes the only reason for conflict is emotions and feelings. A person feels they have been wronged, the other disagrees, and separating the people from the problem becomes virtually impossible. Getting to Yes briefly proposes some solutions to emotion, such as recognizing both side’s emotions, making emotions explicit and acknowledging them as legitimate, allowing the other side to let off steam, not reacting to emotional outbursts, and using symbolic gestures . Again, I found these guidelines to be oversimplified and completely void of the fact that human’s are inapt to simply putting their feelings aside. Also...
Negotiation, as we’ve learned, is the process of communicating where parties can discuss problems and/or targets and attempt to solve them via dialogue in order to reach a resolution. While many individuals feel successful negotiations are due to a natural skill, the truth behind reaching a prime agreement is preparation. You need to know the issue, know yourself, and know your party. This type of preparation also includes knowing your needs and limits, understanding what the other party wants and anticipating their limits, asking the right questions, and being creative in your counteroffers.
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.
McCarthy, A. (n.d.). 10 rules of negotiation. Negotiation Skills. Retrieved March 31, 2014, from http://www.negotiation-skills.org
...w to apply these tactics into practice. Understanding the meaning of each tactics is just the first stage, flexibility in the use of appropriate tactics in future issues is more important. Besides, I need to make a detailed plan before the negotiation. Firstly, analyzing the interests, perspectives and weak points of the opposite side and selecting suitable tactics. Secondly, preparing several response strategies will help me to control the situations. Thirdly, setting the minimum level what I can agree on the issue is also essential part of negotiation.
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2007). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill/ Irwin.
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.