Fisher And Ury: Summary

Neither party should enter the negotiation in a head-on confrontational manner. Both parties should allow the other to be open in their communication, listens carefully to each other’s position and interests, and summarize what is said to clarify understanding. Once both parties have expressed their needs, they must seek alignment.

2) Positional bargaining is a negotiation strategy that involves standing on to a fixed idea, or position and arguing for it and it alone (Spangler, 2003).

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.

The first thing that I learned from completing the Stitt Feld Handy negotiation simulations is that taking positions—focusing on the goal, what one wants, in the early stages of the negotiation process can sometimes result in unfavorable outcomes (Cahn & Abigail, 2014, p.233). Sometimes the best course of action to take is to focus on interests—those underlying needs that are fulfilled by taking various positions, as opposed to focusing on positions (Cahn & Abigail, 2014, p.233). By focusing on interests, it is possible to find common ground and the likelihood of reaching mutually satisfying outcomes is greater.

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

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

After reading the book Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher and William Ury, Getting past No is like a sequel, where the author tries to address the basic concern that each one of us faces while negotiating, the problem of other side being stubborn on a “NO” and not ready to negotiate when we are trying to adopt a principled negotiation approach.

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

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.

In life there is always some type of give and take amongst others. Some exchange may be beneficial and some can be regretful. This is all the same with negotiation, either is to negotiate a divorces decree, price of a new home, or a NFL or NBA contract deal. The world today is full of negotiating situation in and can be executed at any given time. There two common characteristic of a negotiation or bargaining situation. Negotiating parties have separate but conflicting interest.

At this stage negotiators stop focusing on their opponent’s needs and priorities and state their own needs and priorities. It is about creating value for your side and asking for the value that you want in exchange. It is the most highly competitive stage of negotiation. Arguments often take place about the value of items on either side of the equation and whether sufficient value is being offered from the opposing side in exchange. It is important that these arguments are handled even handedly even when negative tactics such as threats are used to move one or the other side to action (Craver, 2004).

Negotiation is the process of two individuals or groups reaching joint agreement about differing needs or ideas. Oliver (1996) described negotiation as "negotiators jointly searching a multidimensional space and then agreeing to a single point in the space." Negotiation is a form of conflict resolution. When we negotiate, the first thing that needs to be established is whether we have two or more parties that have a common objective, but also differ in ideas when it comes to how they achieve the objective. The principle behind negotiating is to finding the middle ground that is suitable for both parties involved. Not all negotiation ends in satisfactory compromise, sometimes negotiations can take a long time to conclude

Furthermore, point out Fisher and Ury, bargaining from the priority of position rather than interests sets the table for the old adversarial (perceived) outcome of one winner and one loser. It need not be that way. Putting interest over positions and sharing those interests and getting the other party to share their interests is part of that 3rd concept added here; honesty and with that honesty comes trust. Trust is necessary for long-term relationships and that trust and the honesty necessary are cultivated by those who are wise and farsighted. Positions are sometimes stubbornly rooted in past events and perspective to the detriment of future outcomes; using shared interests as a starting point for new negotiations can help to put all that aside. Letting positions be the guiding force in negotiations can produce negative outcomes much like letting personalities rule negotiations can.

Negotiation is all about a strategy. The end result is usually to end a problem that someone is having, whether it is personally or

An objective criterion can be used to evaluate the options of the negotiation and thereby creating added value. The invaluable framework in Getting to Yes (Fischer, Ury, & Patton, 1991) sets out the procedures once alternative solutions have been identified and the application of the criteria. The criterion is independent of the parties to the negotiation and therefore, enables a solution resolved around trust and principle of fairness (Fischer et al., 1991). The parties to the negotiation failed to negotiate the joint search for an objective criterion but rather focused on the interests, resulting in a lengthy process deliberating small aspects and supporting favored arguments. Therefore, it’s important that the objective criteria is negotiated in advance to avoid creating a criteria supporting preferred options in the midst of the negotiation inhibiting the creation of values (Zeleny & Cochrane, 1982).