HRM 595 Final Exam Essay

Gina Blair represented a competitive-cooperative negotiation strategy which represented a middle ground, both combined in a style which was open minded but assertive. Gina had scheduled the telephone meeting between herself and Daniel Trent; therefore she had more knowledge about what was going to be discussed. As she had initiated the negotiation she had prepared well for the issues concerning her clients. She presented her negotiation in a logical structure, showing that she had prepared all the areas of concern which she intended to address. Her preparation allowed her to identify and prioritise her client’s concerns. She avoided small talk and was very direct, her approach was assertive and she projected confidence. She had a clear understanding of the issues which were of concern to her clients and had proposed

“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).

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.

Power is never linked to price, but always to value.” Power in negotiations can be perceived or real which affects the final negotiation outcome. Generally all disputants have some power to an extent which is used to achieve a favourable outcome. It is unlikely the power balance stays consistent, power shifts throughout the negotiation process. Knowing how the power works and how to use power to achieve desirable outcome is important for successful negotiations. The notion of parity in power is vital in relationships between the disputants. The parity in negotiation is when one party perceives that the other party can oppose any form of power with dissimilar or similar form of power (Lewicki and Saunders et al., 1997). Power parity means there will be a balance in power positioning to some extent. The two different objective powers involving in the bargaining process are power depending on the lack of dependence and role power (Staff, 2013). The first power parallels to a disputants BATNA (Best alternative to a negotiated agreement). Going into a negotiation with strong BATNA means the disputant is less dependent on the other parties in achieving the desired outcome compared to having a weaker alternative. The second power is linked with the positions, titles or roles which grant power simply because of the control or authority they possess. This is often found in hierarchical organisations. Apart from the objective powers there is possibility of

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.

1. How did you plan for the negotiation? Explain how you decided on a strategy?

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.

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.

b. Evaluate the styles and effectiveness of Messrs. Fontaine, Gaudin, Hauptmann, and Zinnser as negotiators in this case.

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

By taking this course, we have learned the different types of negotiations and the strategies to be used in

An effective negotiator is a strategic negotiator, who is able to switch back and forth between different phases of a negotiation without losing the goal in mind. An effective negotiator takes time to process what is happening during the negotiation and ensures that the right problem is being resolved while taking into consideration other party’s intrests to finding a common ground. Concequently those type of actions facilitate in the process of a negotiation by creating a cooperative environment and enhance the furture relationship between the parties (Fells 2012; Sebenius 2001). An effective negotiator aknowledges that no party is the same and as every negotiation, every negotiator is different from one another. These variations explain the DNA of negotiation that requires an effective negotiator to take into considerations the strands of the DNA, such as “reciprocity, trust, power, information exchange, ethics, and outcome” that vary from person to person (Fells 2012, pg 8).

The fourth mistake runs in parallel with the fifth mistake is to search too hard for common ground which is neglecting BATNA. In fact, a negotiator has to try similarities with the others to have a deal. However, a negotiator has to know where he can’t go and the others alternatives. Moreover, if you try to seek too hard for similarities, you risk stopping the negotiation. Differences of interests can unbundle different elements and give each party what it values the most; many times at least cost to others.

": (1) preparation; (2) establishment of negotiator identities and the tone for the interaction; (3) information exchange; (4) exchange of items to be divided; (5) closing the deal; and (6) maximizing the joint returns." (Craver, 2004)