Mr. Chandler

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:

The negotiators in these situations should mainly on the integrative bargaining. It means that negotiator should arrange a face to face meeting for both the parties by motivating them to practice integrative barging so that they can use the conflict strategy management to innovate positive solutions rather than dysfunctional conflicts. The negotiator should focus mainly on problem solving, compromising, smoothing and finding solutions. Motivating both the parties for a face-to-face meet is done so that, they can identify the problem and resolve it by an open discussion. Each team should give up something so that they can come to an agreement. The negotiator should use smoothing technique by reducing the conflicts while stressing common interests between both the teams. By compromising and smoothing both the parties should know about their common interests and goals and should create a shared goal. Once the negotiator make them realize that they need each other for achieving their goals, integrative positions solutions will be obtained instead of dysfunctional

When two people take opposite sides on any particular issue in a dispute, they both often refuse to budge from their divergent viewpoints. Most likely outcome is a stalemate. If a solution is found then both will win. Negotiation interests largely relate to basic human needs. They are powerful influences in our decision making processes. Interests not only include those tangible desires which correspond to the specific problem at hand such as increasing sales or productivity. They also link to our more basic human emotions that are less obvious to the participants (Negotiations).

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.

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

“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).

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 practice, the negotiation and may be situations where one party (or more) are going to negotiate, not intending to actually not only to decide anything, but even to share their views. For example, the negotiation of a party need only to divert the attention of a partner. So, when it comes to trade negotiations, one of the participants can begin their only to be interested is

A ruthless, aggressive and cold blooded negotiation style is the framework approach most people have when it comes to negotiation,[6] a theoretical example of that is Adversarial Approach Style Negotiation.[6] But in reality, as mentioned by experts and researchers such as Fisher and Ury [3] it doesn’t have to be that way. As the world moves to more sophisticated platforms of communication, negotiation follows the trend and Problem-Solving Approach(citation) is in a way, the “antidote" of Adversarial Approach Style Negotiation. Getting to YES[3] suggest an Interest-Based Model for the use of Problem-Solving Approach. Interest-Based Model focus on separating the person (positional) from the problems (resolution) and then concentrate on the resolution. This way allowing for both parties in a distributive way to get the results they both want.

From different aspects and purposes of business negotiation, the company needs to see issues from various angles to find out real pictures from JYP’s view and others’ views combining with relevant information from enquiry stages. To prepare before negotiation, the company has to know basically what we are.

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

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

We negotiate in our daily lives as well as in business. One negotiates when collaborating with a co-worker on a project, purchasing office furniture or bargaining with a car sales representative to purchase a car. It is essential to understand the process of negotiation to avoid being intimidated by a person or persons who are not bargaining with deceitful intentions. The communication between a negotiator and the other party is the foundation of successful negotiations.

In an impression of this dichotomy, negotiation scholars have reasoned that these methodologies speak to the two ideal models of the negotiation process: distributive bargaining (i.e., Win-Lose) and integrative bargaining or problem-solving (i.e., Win-Win). In the previous circumstance, the groups see their objectives as contrary, while in the last they view themselves as to have good objectives (Remigiusz, 2008).