Structural Approach To Negotiation

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.

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:

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

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the need for an effective negotiator to plan, organize, direct, and control a negotiation. This paper will describe the skills and behavior needed for effective negotiations. An understanding of various negotiating strategies or tactics and how they can be applied in varying types of negotiations will be demonstrated. Technology and information resources will be used to research issues in business

Being successful at negotiating requires one to consider the various styles: win-win, win-lose, lose-win, lose-lose, no deal and compromise negotiation. Each is unique in its outcome and business associates must consider their end goal of the negotiation and when each style of negotiation is

Negotiation is one of the most common approaches used to make decisions and manage disputes. It is also the major building block for many other alternative dispute resolution procedures. According to Christopher W (2012), negotiation is the principal way that people redefine an old relationship that is not working to their satisfaction or establish a new relationship where none existed before. Because negotiation is such a common problem-solving process, it is in everyone 's interest to become familiar with negotiating dynamics and skills. This section is designed to identify what worked well and not well in the negotiation. In addition, to present strategies that generally makes the negotiation more efficient and improvement in the next

Dawson (1995) has highlighted three critical factors to every negotiation4: 1) understanding of power, 2) information factor and 3) time element. But according to Brooks and Odiorne (1984, pp. 45 - 46), strategic planning, power skill and timing, constitute the agenda in successful negotiations5; in which, strategic planning is the key factor in shapes the dimensions, form and context of the negotiations. On the other hand, Mills (1990, pp. 177 - 179) and Scott (1981, pp. 89 - 90) has provides sixteen and eight different elements that contribute to negotiation success6 and enable two parties to negotiate towards agreement to theirs joint advantage7. As a whole, these conclude that in any negotiations, it is important to remember that both parties are working toward mutual satisfaction.

In chess you know the pieces but you can’t see into the other person’s mind. In negotiation you don’t necessarily know the ‘pieces’. You have to discover and develop your own pieces and find ways of uncovering your counterparts’.” The Essentials of Job Negotiations, (2011)

Conflict or disagreement over the range of issues has become inherent aspect of modern organisational life. People from different cultural and education background work in an organisation. People working in an organisation may possess different goal and interest. People working in organisation may tend to different over a range of issues including organisational politics, organisational procedure, personal preference or political preference. It is also argued that conflict is essential characteristics of organisational life. Role of manager is paramount with regard to negotiating the conflict that arises in organisational life (http://www.sagepub.com/). Often lack of

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

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.

The issue of power is inherent in negotiations. In most negotiated conflict situations, one party has more power than another. They may use their greater share of power to shape and manipulate a negotiation to achieve their desired objectives. Furthermore, when the power differential is substantial, this usually has a significant effect on both the substance and process of the dispute. This imbalance in power can be generated by a number of factors such as information and expertise; control over resources (money, supplies, manpower,

According to Halpert et al.’s Path model, negotiation consists of different phases such as preparation, differentiation, exploration, and exchange. The preparation phase in our previous negotiation became an essential part that played a role of evaluation of both parties positions in our successful outcome.

First and foremost, we have to understand negotiation. In many negotiation situations there are two options: Accept or refuse the deal with the other parties. A negotiator seeks to

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