Facts
* This negotiation was an important one from a career point of view as it involves a salary negotiation for an existing job. I have never been in a situation where I have actually negotiated a salary for a person working under me, so it was a good experience for me. I was playing the role of Pat Lynch, V.P. of marketing for Rapid Leatherhead Goods Company. There are 4 main product lines which comprise the major portion of the company’s online sales. A new director for marketing was hired two years ago for mail order sales. He has done a good job with three lines, but the fourth line, which was a problem even before he joined, is still a problem and there has not been an increase in sales for that product. It is the company’s
…show more content…
This reasoning resolved a lot of biases which I had in my head and helped me in understanding the reasoning behind his asking for a raise of 20%. We started exchanging information and I told him while he had done a good job for three lines, the Top Flite line was a major area of concern for me, and it was very important that a positive increase in sales be seen in this area. * Invent options for mutual gain: I knew that the main goal was to focus on mutual interest and come to an agreement which would be beneficial for all parties involved. I knew that my main interest was to see an increase in the sales of Top Flite, and his major area of interest was getting a better salary hike. Thus we came up with options for mutual gain. I agreed to a 10% salary hike this year, and if he could bring the sales of Top Flite up to the estimated target for this year I would give him 15% hike.
* Insist on objective criteria: It was very important that we insisted on objective criteria during the negotiation. I asked him the reasons for the hike he was asking for. I also told him the reasons why I could not offer him the hike he was expecting. I was open to him asking me questions and wanted him to be satisfied with what he was being offered. I believe that employee satisfaction is important and it is important that he did not leave the room feeling unsatisfied. I was convinced that a salary hike of around 6 2/3% was too low
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
For this negotiation I have three types of goals in place. My substantive goals are to negotiate a contract that will bring in $5.8m (target point 3) and to also secure future contracts with Knight. With
Our team approached this negotiation case in a very efficient way. Each of us had a very clearly job assignment. Two people took care of the calculation while the other two people were responsible for the negotiation. Thus we quickly built up a model and provided several options to our counterparts with different terms but same net value of the final bargaining agreement to our team.
Negotiations are a part of daily life whether we are aware of them occurring or not. In everything that we do there are preferred end results and the end results are likely to affect more than one person. The goal in this however, is to ensure that all parties are equally benefited from the actions and reactions that occur to create that end result. While some dealings are done in a more subtle manner without a great deal of negotiation per say there are other situations that would warrant more vocalized mutually acceptable compromises. The purpose of this paper will be to effectively explain a situation of which required negotiation on the part of both parties that almost all of us have endured and that would be the process of buying a
Fontaine's or Gaudin's had good bargaining techniques. In my opinion these employees did not have enough time on the job, experience or in the business Their preparation for negotiations with Relient was inadequate. Adequate preparation should include careful study of strengths and weakness of both side along with the study of the need of the other party and ways to satisfy those needs. Every time that Fontaine's and Gaudin's met with Relient they should of tried to aim high to successfully get a good
Summary: This was a multiparty negotiation, which involved 6 players all with very different negotiation styles. It was an exercise in which teams easily form a coalition. There were concessions about the value added each team would bring to the “table”, and my team in a situation of power saw how negatively the other teams reacted in name of fairness and how important was to share the pie.
A skilled negotiator spends enough amount of time in preparation and planning. In the preparation and planning of this negotiation I gathered all the positive points to my advantage and planned how to put them in a sequence so that my opponent could
1. How did you plan for the negotiation? Explain how you decided on a strategy?
Going into this negotiation as the VP of operations my goal was to primarily succeed in buying the restaurant. Prior to starting the negotiation, i identified several certain non monetary concessions that could be made to sweeten the deal such as paying a percentage of travel expenses, and also allowing the restaurant owner
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.
The next three issues we negotiated were editorial control, preproduction budget, and post production schedule. Again we logrolled with the issues and came to an agreeable decision. The outcome of the negotiation of this particular bundle was evenly distributed. I felt that the director was willing to collaborate with me on these issues. I wanted the entire negotiation to follow the concept of the integrative negotiation process by setting the tone of the negotiation as a win-win. Reflecting on how the negotiation was going to this point I felt that I may have conceded on more of the issues than the director, but the hope was that the director would concede on the issues that were important to me. I felt I was sensitive to the director’s
Negotiation is one important part of both the professional and personal life in our everyday situations. It is critical for people to resolve disputes, distribute limited resources, and/or create something new that neither party could achieve on his or her own. Negotiations can range from coordinating project timelines with clients to asking for a raise to discussing holiday plans with family members.
Negotiation is the process of making amicable decisions between individuals or groups. In this assignment, I will discuss a negotiation that did not result in the best possible solution for all parties. This negotiation was related to my work experience where I was a realtor who was representing a buyer in negotiation of the property’s price, mortgage loan rate and terms. I am a real estate licensee and also a member of National Association of Realtors. I have been practicing my license for seven years now. Seven years of experiences in real estate industry
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
Both our approaches were directed towards addressing the issues with a collaborative spirit for the greatest benefit to both sides. We agreed that both sides wanted to establish a long term a relationship with each other and were willing to give genuine consideration to each other’s particular needs and interests. This experience has enabled me to reflect on my personal approach towards negotiation, as well as analyze my strengths and potential areas for improvement as a negotiator.