Negotiation Techniques And Objectives: A Comprehensive Overview

The Importance of Negotiation Skills in Business Organizations

Write a report that compares and contrasts the two approaches to negotiation, making a recommendation as to which approach you consider is the most effective.

Negotiation may be defined as processes through differences are settled. It is a process through which compromise is achieved. There are some process through which arguments can be avoided. There are disagreements within people and groups through which people try to attain the effective outcomes. The negotiation techniques are important in the business organizations. There are different negotiation techniques that are used in different situations. These are governmental affairs, corporate disputes and industrial matters and others. It is essential that negotiation skills must be applied to different courses of action. Negotiation skills are needed to be applied during the variations that arise at different time.

The following are the Negotiation objectives:

• To reach to a concluding point.
• Negotiation helps in getting rid out of the obstacles that may arise in the future.
• To exercise different management techniques over the different management contract has been undertaken (Susskind, 2015).
• The influencer must be provide co-operation and negotiation must be achieved.
• The cordial relations must be achieved within the competent parties.

Negotiation refers to ensuring that all the pertinent facts are available in hand and therefore all the parties must be clear about the situation. This include that organization rules are included and help must be appropriately provided. The organization must have deliberate policies through which the parties are prepared for the negotiation. It is essential to undertake the discussion before adopting any methodology and ensuring meetings (Bordone and Viscomi, 2015).

Competitive based negotiation and

Problem solving based negotiation.

In competitive based negotiation, approach is that methodology is whether the party win or loss. Competitive negotiation is also called as the hard bargaining or distributive negotiation (Cutcher-Gershenfeld, 2016).

1. Leave very little chance-This is a negotiation process wherein the parties have win-win chances. Negotiation is a dynamic process that has all the essential components and which can be negotiated at any time.
2. Persistence and inventive-Advantage continually goes to the patient negotiate World Health Organization persistently pursues creative win/win solutions. Negotiation may be an advanced method that takes time. Sometimes, progress comes in little increments.
3. Listening to Audience-The most effective negotiation technique is listening and asking different queries rather than talking. It is essential to generate understanding of information and which takes precedence over the information sharing (Matz, 2015).
4. Shows Empathy- It is essential to know that people are sensitive to the emotions and thoughts and experiences must be shared to another party. The different frame of interests and positions must be created.
5. Nonverbal cues-All the negotiation parties are sensitive to the nonverbal cues and they will additionally look after those that matters a lot (Eisenkraft, 2017).
6. B) Assumptions
7. Zero Sum-Zero Sum refers to the assumption of the competitive negotiation which is zero game. People involved with this negotiation technique, the parties need to look for what the dealing parties desire. There are chances that one party may gain and the other party may lose. It is simple to arguing over the piece of pie. There are chances that one person may get the pie and other may do not get.
8. Win-lose- The conclusion of zero sum conflict has been defined with reference to winners and losing. There are chances that one individual may get what it wants and the other individual feels cheated and has to face failure (Stuart, 2013).

1. A Substance only-In a competitive based negotiation, the substance being traded is of great concern and dealings must be done in hard and what can I get methods. The zero-sum can be translated into the monetary terms. For instance-when an individual is purchasing the car, then it is essential to think about the resale value. One of the most important components for competitive negotiation is price.
2. Unimportant relationship- In a competitive negotiation, relationship between two people is regarded as not very important. The people do not care for one another or what the other person is thinking about the other person. There are concerns that the other individual is weak and the other party can take the advantage of same. This is a tricky situation where the concerns are false and reactions is perceived to be likely tricking and can be lead to two faced dealing situations (Malhotra and Bazerman, 2015).
3. C) Risk factors

• High opening demands
• Threats, tension and pressure
• Volunteering only information that is beneficial
• Manipulation and exaggeration of the facts
• Viewing outcomes as win/lose
• Attempting to achieve victory
• Positions
• Conceding only that which is undeniable (Benziman, 2016)
• Potential Impact on relationships of each approach

Certain methods and behaviors supposed to form price. Different methods and behaviors supposed to assert price. The cooperative communicator can need to initial assist the negotiating parties to form most prices for instance, then facilitate the participants to work out however best to divide those known potential edges.

This is a form of an integrative based negotiation and this is a negotiation strategy where in the two parties collaborate and seek win-win situation for finding the solution to dispute. The strategy focuses on the development of Mutualism agreements that are supported through the disputing parties (Olekalns and Druckman, 2014).

1. Things must not be taken personally-There are instances where the individual feels completely embarrassed, angry, frustrated and needs to think about the belief of the other party. It is essential to show some intelligence and act sedately (Sebenius, 2017).
2. Be innovative problem-The individual must be an innovative problem solver and if any case, win-win scenario is found, then spirited action must incorporate the cooperative actions. These are targeted to finding the compromise and joint finding.
3. Keep versatile-Negotiation must be taken as the positive movement. It must have flexibility. There must be gap and reciprocal acceptable resolution provided.
4. Learn from mistakes-In order to be an effective or successful negotiator, irrespective of the negotiation stage, it is essential to be absolutely professional and take somewhat middle decisions.
5. Adopt results with Relationship approach- An effective and successful negotiator approach is realizing the win-win outcomes. There must be an acceptable resolution that can satisfy the different interest levels of every different party associated with the conflict at the expense of others.
6. Assumptions
7. Method interests-folks have a ‘‘process’’ interest in having disagreements resolved in a very manner they contemplate truthful.
8. Personal interests-The majority has a private interest in feeling revered in their work and as kith and kin, and in being seen as acting systematically with what they need aforementioned within the past (Crump, 2016).
9. Relative interests. The parties may additionally have an interest in protecting or making an in progress relationship. This is often notably true in writing agreement disputes, as a result of the terrible existence of a contract indicates that the parties.
10. Economic interests-Disputants sometimes have economic or substantive interests. This is often wherever most negotiations begin and wherever several finishes unsuccessful as a result of different interests aren’t self-addressed.
11. C) Risk factors

• Conceding solely that that is plain
• Viewing outcomes as win/lose
• Attempting to realize finish (Wheeler, 2015)
• Potential Impact on relationships of each approach

Problem-solving negotiators use intensely cooperative, interest-based ways. Drawback solvers focus nearly solely on finding solutions which will maximize the worth of the deal for each party. Drawback solvers don’t need to get a more robust outcome for his or her consumer at the expense of their counterpart and demand on mistreatment genuinely neutral principles to accomplish the task of allocating advantages. Negotiation is viewed as a collaboration to resolve the challenge of finding opportunities for making extra price through complementary interests (Smolinski and Kesting, 2013).

Negotiation Objectives: Ensuring Pertinent Facts and Deliberate Policies

External circumstances will have an effect on your negotiation method and will be mirrored in your development of objectives. Major influences embrace the state of the economy, or perhaps merely in the market position of your negotiating partner. In reality, the construct of a “buyers’ market” and “sellers’ market” compactly describes this idea. Robust economic times or slow markets, enhance a supplier’s temperament to barter on worth and different parameters of the deal. In sturdy economic times, suppliers and contractors usually have enough demand for his or her offerings that they ought not to negotiate on worth, though they may respond in your like better to different points of negotiation, like extending a contract at no further value (Eriksson and Sandberg, 2012).

An early voice for the problem-solving approach to negotiation summarized the method as follows: ‘‘the artistic problem-solving approach printed here depends on 2 structural components:

(1) Distinguishing the parties’ underlying objectives, and

(2) Crafting solutions, initial by making an attempt to fulfill those desires directly, and second, by making an attempt to fulfill a lot of these desires through increasing the resources obtainable (Bordone and Carr, 2013).

(3) By utilizing such a framework for negotiations, the parties ought to acknowledge the synergistic advantage of such an approach over the adversarial and artful methods of zero-sum negotiations.

There are assured assumptions that lie behind the competitive approach to negotiation. The basic read of the globe may be a distributive one. This approach tends to form the subsequent assumptions:

1. Negotiation is that the division of restricted resources wherever one side’s gain is that the alternative side’s loss; and
2. A deal created these days won’t materially have an effect on the alternatives obtainable tomorrow.

Notice that, to the extent these assumptions are false, the cooperative professional person will use this known falsity as a lever to encourage a lot of cooperative approaches (McKersie and Walton, 2015).

Conclusion

In negotiation, there are several varieties of interests: multiple interests, shared interests, compatible interests and conflicting interests. Distinguishing shared and compatible interests as “common ground” are often useful in establishing a foundation for extra discussions. “Easy points of agreement” are known and therefore the principles underlying those simple points of agreement will often be cypher to assist resolve alternative problems. Note that that specializes in interests directs the discussion in this and future, aloof from the difficulties of the past. The association that exists between two different parties must be explained. All the concerned parties are connected and what role will be played by a given party and what will be its role in the negotiation process. It is essential to speak about the requirements of different parties concerned and agreements can seek through the negotiation process. It is essential to analyze the required outcomes as well as the needs of different parties. Outline whether they are any alternatives available to a given party. There must be possibilities that support agreement cannot be reached. What are the sustainable outcomes and substitute available to the given parties. What choices are available and whether the parties have expressed flexibility in terms of their decisions.

References

Benziman, Y. (2016). Ingredients of a Successful Track Two Negotiation. Negotiation Journal, 32(1), pp.49-62.

Bordone, R. and Carr, C. (2013). Critical Decisions in Negotiation: A New Video Resource for Teaching Negotiation. Negotiation Journal, 29(4), pp.463-476.

Bordone, R. and Viscomi, R. (2015). The Wicked Problem of Rethinking Negotiation Teaching. Negotiation Journal, 31(1), pp.65-81.

Crump, L. (2016). Toward a Theory of Negotiation Precedent. Negotiation Journal, 32(2), pp.85-102.

Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J. (2016). Howard Raiffa: Negotiation Pioneer (1924-2016). Negotiation Journal, 32(4), pp.357-359.

Eisenkraft, N. (2017). CustomNegotiations.org: A Free Resource for Creating Custom Negotiation Simulations. Negotiation Journal, 33(3), pp.239-253.

Eriksson, K. and Sandberg, A. (2012). Gender Differences in Initiation of Negotiation: Does the Gender of the Negotiation Counterpart Matter?. Negotiation Journal, 28(4), pp.407-428.

Malhotra, D. and Bazerman, M. (2015). Bounded Rationality, Negotiation Perception, and Attitudinal Structuring. Negotiation Journal, 31(4), pp.363-364.

Matz, D. (2015). Negotiation and the Art of Narrative. Negotiation Journal, 31(3), pp.285-290.

McKersie, R. and Walton, R. (2015). Reflections on Negotiation Theory, Practice, and Education: A Robust Record and New Opportunities. Negotiation Journal, 31(4), pp.491-499.

Olekalns, M. and Druckman, D. (2014). With Feeling: How Emotions Shape Negotiation. Negotiation Journal, 30(4), pp.455-478.

Sebenius, J. (2017). BATNAs in Negotiation: Common Errors and Three Kinds of “No”. Negotiation Journal, 33(2), pp.89-99.

Smolinski, R. and Kesting, P. (2013). World Championship in Negotiation? The Role of Competitions in Negotiation Pedagogy. Negotiation Journal, 29(3), pp.355-369.

Stuart, H. (2013). Performance and the Art of Negotiation. Negotiation Journal, 29(4), pp.487-492.

Susskind, L. (2015). The Undecided Future of Negotiation Pedagogy: An Introduction. Negotiation Journal, 31(4), pp.461-464.

Wheeler, M. (2015). Learning to Teach Negotiation. Negotiation Journal, 31(4), pp.477-490.