Best Practices in Negotiations, Article Review

Gina Blair and Daniel Trent cooperate and collaborate to achieve a common objective throughout their negotiation. A cooperative negotiation style is demonstrated as they combine their points of view regarding their clients concerns with outcomes to effectively solve the issues raised. The main focus of the negotiation is to reach an agreement rather than a continuous dispute. Accordingly, the conflicting objectives were resolved by compromises and solutions but forward by both Gina and Daniel. The negotiation style used between Gina and Daniel is described as principled negotiation where both parties jointly attack the problems arising to achieve a compromise.

This introduction talks about Negotiation concepts. BATNA (Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement) is the last proposal that a person can do before exiting the negotiation. You have to prepare your BATNA before the negotiation to keep in mind what is your alternative solution if the agreement cannot be reach.

At the same time, I also realized that the negotiation partners are not always having the conflict interests during the negotiation. In this case, for some of the issues, we actually have the same goals. So baring this in mind, in the future negotiation case, I would first seek the common goals for both of us first to create a win-win situation.

This paper presents my reflections on the Negotiations: Strategy and practice coursework in the MBA program at Said Business School, University of Oxford. My paper will present various reflections on different themes of negotiation simulation undertaken by me during the course. This course has allowed investigating and reflecting on key drivers of negotiation techniques for me. I have learned that transparency and coalition are the core tenet of negotiation for me. For the purpose of this reflective exercise, I will conduct a comparative analysis of the process, dynamics and outcomes based on the themes such as negotiation styles, bargaining zones, power, emotion, coalitions, value claiming vs value creation etc. for the below-mentioned simulations:

Also, I learned that one must always have a complete understanding of what is their Best Alternative to No Agreement (BATNA) before going into a negotiation with an opponent. The BATNA is also known as the Consequences of No Deal (CONA). The crucial point to be noted about understanding ones BATNA or CONA is that the negotiator is now able to know at which point of the negotiation it would be better to walk away. This occurs when the deal you have just agreed to is below your BATNA or CONA. Therefore, this leave you in a worse of situation when compared to if you had walked away from the negotiation without coming to an agreement.

Negotiation is a fundamental form of dispute resolution involving two or more parties (Michelle, M.2003). 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 (Lewicki and Saunders et al., 1997). 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.

“Successful negotiation is not about getting to ‘yes’; it’s about mastering ‘no’ and understanding the path to an agreement is” (Christopher Voss). During the negotiation process, there are a lot of moving parts and personalities. In addition, hurt feelings can all too often get in the way. The bottom line of any negotiation is to reach a settlement that will mutually benefit both parties. It’s a challenging situation by which compromise or agreement is reached while attempting to avoid arguments and disputes.

In this negotiation exercise, I was assigned as the Seaborne Governor’s negotiator as part of a six member party meeting to negotiate a deal with Harborco to build and operate a deepwater port off the coast of Seaborne. The Governor on the whole was very interested in seeing this deepwater port built in Seaborne as she believes that the size of the project would provide the stimulus for a dramatic recovery in the state.

Consequently, negotiation is a process that can be approached in many ways. No matter what strategy we choose, success lies in how well we prepared. The key to negotiating a beneficial outcome is the negotiators’ ability to consider all the elements of the situation carefully and to identify and think through the options. At the same time, negotiators must be able to keep events in perspective and be as fair and honest as circumstance allows. Because a common ground or interest has brought the parties to the negotiating table, a negotiator can benefit by trying to capitalize on this common

It is a complex social process which already becomes part and parcel of our society.

Here’s where negotiations with more than one party gets tricky. When you just have one partner, you typically only need to calculate your BATNA and the other side’s once. As the number of parties increases, BATNA calculations and resulting considerations of possible settlements take on a kaleidoscopic quality. In a multiparty negotiation, you must recalculate your BATNA every time you imagine a new coalition that strands you on the outside of an agreement.

The TexasAgs oil company case study gave us insights on different aspects of a negotiation that can happen in real world scenarios. It elegantly portrayed the importance of having a BATNA, setting target and restriction points, impact of the fluctuating markets on the ongoing negotiations, downside of the emotional behavior, importance of having a third party member or mediator in the negotiation. The case illustrates that the negotiations should be based assumptions as they may or may not be right. Having facts and understanding the other parties true objectives and goals are truly essential in negotiation. It is a typical example of how the current power on one side can dominate and take complete advantage of their position.

I feel that if you are a good negotiator, the other party or the situation that you are negotiating with doesn’t really matter. A good negotiator always has several alternatives, so that they don’t get stuck in negotiations or a situation. You have to know what you are doing and if it will benefit you in a negotiation.

Whether it is at work, church or in our private relationships, negotiations are a necessary tool for reaching an agreement. They are made by discussing each parties point of view with the aim being to reach an agreement that is mutually beneficial. For the most part, negotiation is the process by which those people involved successfully adopt or abandon their respective position through the use of positional bargaining. There are different types of approaches for the negotiation process - some hard and others soft in their manner of approach. The desired outcome of

Although, I am not that strong in leading a negotiation towards it’s ultimate goal. In order to increase the probability of a successful negotiation, for me as an individual, first I should identify the required steps and the order they should be taken in the course of a negotiation and try not to skip any step. The second item in my action plan is to improve my ability to construct trust-based negotiation. If trust is the basis of a negotiation, then both involved parties can think of a long relationship rather than one time transaction and it is what matters.