“Instead of approaching the problem in a competitive as distributive bargaining (claiming value only for one), the integrative negotiation the parties adopt an attitude aimed at solving the problem and seek a favorable outcome for both” (Business Blog Review, 2011).
Throughout the lecture and my prior knowledge, I identified that the influence tactics are obviously relevant to negotiation and they can be utilized in a variety of ways in negotiation. Looking back the activity, it enabled me to have a better understanding of these important techniques and skills as certain tactics my opponents and I may use were examined at the negotiating table.
In this course, I have learned that it is possible to dramatically improve my ability to negotiate. I can improve my monetary returns and feel better about myself and the people with whom I deal. I also learned that there are several ways to test my intuition and approach. The course provided me with an opportunity to assess my “instinctive” bargaining style and provides suggestions for how to further develop my bargaining abilities. The negotiation exercises were a good way to cement several of the concepts from the book and lecture and gave me several opportunities to get to know my classmate more and test some new insights with them.
The negotiation between Joe and Leigh had elements of distributive bargaining, but their relationship and the outcome of the negotiation were important to both parties, thus, this negotiation also had collaborative bargaining characteristics (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2010). When using this strategy, the objective is to maximize your outcome on the substantive issues while enhancing the quality of the relationship with the other party (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2011). In a job offer negotiation between two familiar parties, it is important to find a mutually satisfying solution to also enhance business performance.
During our negotiation with D.G. Barnhouse (DGB), we intend to utilize an integrative bargaining strategy with management. Before coming to this conclusion, we weighed the advantages and disadvantages of a distributive approach, however, we eventually decided to take an integrative and predominantly interest based stance versus a position based stance in our negotiations after assessing internal and external environmental factors. In addition, we settled on this strategy because we ultimately believe that management and the union share at the very least, one fundamental common interest, which is the firm’s financial stability. That being said, even with our plans to use integrative bargaining, we still plan to negotiate assertively to achieve
The Collaborating tactic may be used when your whole objective on the conflict is to learn. Also it is a good idea to use the Collaborating tactic when you want to work through feeling that have interfered with the relationship with the other person in the conflict. Competing tactic is excellent when you want to cut the through all of the non sense and get to a resolution of the conflict quickly. When quick decisive resolutions are very important, or when people attempt to disagree with you and your right without a doubt. The last tactic that Rahim and Magner talk about is the Compromising tactic. This is good for when, goals are important to you but they are not worth all the trouble they may cause. To achieve rather quick and easy resolutions to rather complex disagreements
It occurs in profit or non profit organizations, government sectors, dealing among nations and also in our personal situations such as salary package, house purchase, marriage, divorce and etc. The strategy to use can either be distributive or integrative depending on the situations and the outcomes that the party want out from the negotiation.
Getting to YES, Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In is an excellent book that discusses the best methods of negotiation. The book is divided into three sections that include defining the problem, the method to solve it, and possible scenarios that may arise when using these methods. Each section is broken down into a series of chapters that is simple to navigate and outlines each of the ideas in a way that is easy for any reader to comprehend. There are also several real life explanations for each issue that make the concepts easier to apply and understand. These ideas are reflective of a method developed by the Harvard Negotiation Project called “principled negotiation”. This method combines the two ideas of soft and hard negotiation
The different between informative, explanation, persuasive and critical thinking the both work together to make good claim. Informative stated that you understand the fact you claim. Explanatory statement describes specific statement that show how much you know about the topic are persuading audience to agree. Persuasive statement explains why your point is correct and has a specific point to support your claim. Critical thinking connects of the three statement together because before you persuade someone, you will first of all find out the right statement to use so that you will make a logical
During our class bargaining experiment of the class syllabus, our negotiations involved all of the sub processes we discussed earlier this week. Firstly, we started with the process of distributive bargaining where a "gap" was created; this gap is created due to both parties wanting what is in their best interest. Not all parties want the same thing, in our case we the students wanted less stress, an exam to be dropped and a non comprehensive final(for most of us), while also bettering our understanding of the class material. Dr. Gough found our demands to be just that, demands and fired back multiple different demands/interest of his own which involved a comprehensive final, no exams to be dropped, and the possibility of multiple finals.
Integrative Psychotherapy grasps a demeanor towards the act of therapy that emphasizes the absolute assessment of every person. The integrative strategy is stamped by uncovering a variety of methods for incorporating numerous speculation and strategies (Corey, 2013). It is a binding together different approaching, and incorporating them that is basically the objective. The therapy will be fitting and successful if the client is feeling, behavioral, intellectual, and physiological levels are working towards the best measure of life. This method energizes the wellbeing of the individual, and identify with the person’s identity, and the needs.
The first chapter talks about not bargaining over positions. Most people negotiate by staking out extreme positions in the beginning and then negotiating towards a middle ground compromise. This is a bad idea because right from the start both sides are committed to their position and will defend it to the end. This
The TKI Assessment allowed me to gain an honest understand of what my negotiation tendencies are between competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating. No single style is the best to have or necessarily the “right” answer, but the assessment does help you understand your true tendencies for dealing with a conflict. Knowing where you rank on this assessment is important for knowing where your deficiencies and your strengths. This coincides with chapter five in learning what type of negotiation style you use, when, and how you can improve your negotiation tactics arsenal. The main lesson that I have learned from these activities is that relying too heavily on one negotiation style is not appropriate because the same styles