Negotiation is a discussion between two or more disputants who are trying to work out a solution to their problem. This interpersonal or inter-group process can occur at a personal level, as well as at a corporate or international (diplomatic) level. Negotiations typically take place because the parties wish to create something new that neither could do on his or her own, or to resolve a problem or dispute between them. The parties acknowledge that there is some conflict of interest between them and think they can use some form of influence to get a better deal, rather than simply taking what the other side will voluntarily give them. In this essay, we will compare the similarity and difference between two negotiation books namely, “Getting …show more content…
Identifying our best alternative is especially important because this is what gives us leverage in a negotiation. With a strong alternative we are more powerful in the negotiation.
Both books talk about the negotiating power during the negotiation process. In his book, George Siedel talks about how there are two sources of power in negotiation. First, information in general is an important source of power. Second, specific information about your and the other side’s BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement) can be used to increase your power and weaken the power of the other side. And he emphasized that a one of the characteristic of a good negotiator is that he is a “careful listener”. He said, to “receive” information, negotiators must not only ask questions; they must listen carefully to answers. The ability to listen distinguishes skilled negotiators from average negotiators and it is also an important leadership skill (Siedel). While in the 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
…show more content…
The dictionary definition of ethics is: "a system of moral principles or values; the rules or standards governing the conduct of the members of a profession; accepted principles of right or wrong." Ethics establish the means of doing what is right, fair and honest. In their book, getting to yes, Richard fish and William fry explores the intricacies of ethics in negotiations addressing questions like what to do if your counterpart in the negotiation process throw you off balance? Or what if he escalates his demands just when you are on the verge of agreement? (Fisher & Ury). In the Negotiating for Success by George siedel, the author describes a set of ethical guidelines to follow such as law-based ethical standards. To conceptualize the relationship between law and ethics, visualize two overlapping circles. The circle on the left represents legal principles and the circle on the right represents ethical principles. The section of the legal circle that does not intersect the ethical circle represents legal rules that have little or nothing to do with ethics. For example, the law for citizens drinking alcohol in some countries is 21 but in other countries it is 18 years of age. This is simply a legal rule of convenience that is unrelated to ethical considerations. The section of the ethics circle that does not intersect the legal circle represents situations where the law does not
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2011). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New
I included this paper because I enjoyed the discussion about the qualities of a good negotiator. Good negotiators are usually people who are respectful others, can develop a strategic negotiation plan, and understand you have to think about certain things, like the “big picture” of a situation in order to generate creative options (Dietmeyer, 2008). One of the reasons why I included this written work in my Artifact, was for the second part of the assignment, we were required to describe a conflict scenario. For that conflict scenario, we were to evaluate reasons as to why utilizing negotiation would be wrong for that situation. Next, we were allowed to take the opposite approach, and list reasons as to why we should use negotiation techniques for the conflict scenario. I always enjoy getting to do assignments that look at both ends of the spectrum: “why should we do something and why should we not do something.” If you have ever been in therapy, it sort of like doing the “empty chair exercise” that some therapists ask you to do when a client is experiencing conflict. And essentially, the whole point of the exercise is for the individual to be able to experience different aspects of a conflict in a new manner through the “empty-chair”
Bargaining and negotiation are part of everyday lives and in the case of Smith and Fischer an initial bargain agreement was established. BATNA or Best alternative to a negotiated agreement is defined as the best method that can be used to convince...
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 ...
Whether or not we are aware of it, each of us is faced with an abundance of conflict each and every day. From the division of chores within a household, to asking one’s boss for a raise, we’ve all learned the basic skills of negotiation. A national bestseller, Getting to Yes, introduces the method of principled negotiation, a form of alternative dispute resolutions as opposed to the common method of positional bargaining. Within the book, four basic elements of principled negotiation are stressed; separate the people from the problem, focus on interests instead of positions, invest options for mutual gain, and insist on using objective criteria. Following this section of the book are suggestions for problems that may occur and finally a conclusion. In this journal entry I will be taking a closer look at each of the elements, and critically analyse the content; ultimately, I aim to briefly bring forth the pros and cons of Getting to Yes.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2006). Negotiation: Readings, Exercises and Cases (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
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...
The negotiation revolved around three main individuals, Terry Hardel, Josephine McNair, and Joe Abernathy. For this negotiation, my partner played the part of Joe while I played Terry. We were both given the same general instructions. However, an additional set of secret instructions were given to each of us separately.
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.
...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.