(Edwin, 2002, p 67) The purpose for mediator is clearing target and interest for parties, evaluating advantages and disadvantages for each position, exploring possible options, and encouraging them to reach agreement. A sapiential mediator has significant impacts on handling troublesome problems and facilitating parties to achieve consensus during the negotiation process. Firstly, mediators impel to persuade interlocutors separate interpersonal relationship from the essence of negotiation, and build bridge to connect these two parties. Moreover, mediator provides a neutral stage and give faces to both parties convert controversy to reconciliation when neither of them makes a concession. At the same time, a compromise suggestion which... ... middle of paper ... ...isputes and relax relationship when negotiation sink into deadlock, and it also encourage parties to achieve consensus.
It can be fa... ... middle of paper ... ... suitable” “I do not think” “it is too expensive” and asking “Why” “What if” “How” questions, but newer say “No” or reject offer at the beginning. During the bargaining facts and logic have to control situation, we shall avoid that emotions take over strategy, even if opponent will try to attack us. When distributive bargaining do not work, integrative can take a place. Integrative bargaining is also known as “win-win” situation, and in this situation aim of negotiating process is to create as much values for each side as it is possible. We have to create new values that can be offered to an opponent to claim needed ones.
William James once said, “Whenever you’re in conflict with someone, there is one factor that can make the difference between damaging your relationship and deepening it. That factor is attitude.” Mediation is a process that can help parties resolve conflict. Even though mediators are not supposed to change the attitudes of parties they can show them the situation in a different light, thus causing the parties’ attitudes to change and the conflict to be resolved. Mediators need to understand there is a lot that goes into conflict and by understanding these concepts and theories they can mediate the dispute in a more thorough and proper way. Some parties might be trying to save face and that is why they are not being honest or telling the truth.
BATNA means the Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. You should not expect success in negotiation unless you are able to make the side an offer they find more attractive than their own BATNA.  For instance, if I can establish a better offer, the other party may want to drop his offer and accepts mine. However, if the BATNA is worse than that offered by the other party, I would have to seriously consider accepting the other party’s offer after making an effort to improve its terms. Persuasion also comes with effective communication.
The process of Distributive bargaining involves the consideration of the minimum and maximum values that one can accept before walking away from the deal, and the same minimum and maximum “walk away” values of the others involved (Spangler, 2003). The trick is to obtain an idea of where the opponent's walk away value is, and try to attempt to negotiate to something closer to your own goal than theirs (Appendix B). Distributive bargaining puts a high amount of value on information in regards to gaining an advantage in negotiations. Each participant should do their best to protect the information of their walk away values while attempting to gain more information from opponents. Your bargaining power in this type of situation is dependent heavily on how clear you are with your goals, walk away value, and alternatives, as well as how much you know about your opponents.
Such is present in negotiations. The wise thing to remember that in achieving a mutually satisfactory agreement, focus must be given to the respective parties’ hidden agenda and not merely on positions itself. It may come as a surprise that both parties underneath have similar interests. However, before reconciling differing interests, a negotiator must be able to identify the underlying interests. Fisher and Ury offer a set of questions to easily identify them.
It is possible and somewhat likely that a pre-arbitration settlement will be reached by the parties once they see the bottom line offer the other side is presenting. If the arbitrator must make a decision, at least both of the settlement choices were chosen by the parties themselves. Final-offer arbitration can minimize or eliminate the "chilling effect" which is the practice of disputing parties putting forth less than best offers during negotiations in hopes that the arbitrator will make a decision that will split the differences between the offers. The beauty of final-offer arbitration is the motivation provided to parties to determine for themselves their last and best offers carefully. The truly last, best offer of the other side can be considered during the grace period to negotiate a settlement between the final two
He said, to “receive” information, negotiators must not only ask questions; they must listen carefully to answers because information is key to negotiating power. The ability to listen distinguishes skilled negotiators from average negotiators and it is also an important leadership skill (Siedel). While in Getting to Yes, explains that negotiating power can be developed and improved by BATNA. Applying knowledge, time, money, people, connections, and wits into devising the best solution for you independent of the other side's assent. The more easily and happily you can walk away from a negotiation, the greater your capacity to affect its
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. The political scientist Robert Dahl (1957:202), defines power as: “A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something B would not othe... ... middle of paper ... ...ing or devaluing the needs and wants of a less powerful disputant. Power combined with perspective taking results in constructive and integrative negotiation.