Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher
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 conclusion. In this journal entry I will be taking a closer look at each of the elements, and critically analyse the content; ultimately, I aim to briefly bring forth the pros and cons of Getting to Yes.
Principled negotiation allows disputants to obtain what they are entitled to, while enabling them to be fair, at the same time protecting against those who would take advantage of their fairness . Although the points made are logical and indeed a great approach to certain types of conflict, I found that in some cases the method did not completely come together. More than anything, I found the method altogether was simplistic and for an ideal situation. While going through the four elements, I shall illustrate these points.
The first method of principled negotiation is to separate the people from the problem. Although it seems to be quite a simple process, I found a major question came to mind: “What if the people are the problem?”. Being a teenager, I know that sometimes the only reason for conflict is emotions and feelings. A person feels they have been wronged, the other disagrees, and separating the people from the problem becomes virtually impossible. Getting to Yes briefly proposes some solutions to emotion, such as recognizing both side’s emotions, making emotions explicit and acknowledging them as legitimate, allowing the other side to let off steam, not reacting to emotional outbursts, and using symbolic gestures . Again, I found these guidelines to be oversimplified and completely void of the fact that human’s are inapt to simply putting their feelings aside. Also...
... middle of paper ...
...Although this theory is very rational and scholarly it again asks for a very ideal situation of fairness where the chances of both disputants coming to these terms seems unattainable. Also, it is quite obvious that what one sees as fair, another may not. All the same, the theory by itself provides great principles for negotiation that if followed honestly by both parties would most likely lead to a satisfactory agreement.
In conclusion, the theory of principled negotiation is very impressive, although it at times seems to be simplistic and meant for an ideal world. Nevertheless, it allows all sides of the conflict to be examined through the broadening of options. It allows disputants to maintain any relationship that they had before the conflict and negotiation. Overall, principled negotiation is meant to lead to satisfactory results for both sides, creating a win-win situation for all.
Works Cited
Colti, Laurie S. Conflict Diagnosis and Alternative Dispute Resolution. New Jersey,
USA.: Pearson Education, 2004.
Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. Getting to Yes: Negotiation Agreement
Without Giving In. New York, USA.: Penguin Books, 1991.
The concepts discussed within the article regarding medicalization and changes within the field of medicine served to be new knowledge for me as the article addressed multiple different aspects regarding the growth of medicalization from a sociological standpoint. Furthermore, the article “The Shifting Engines of Medicalization” discussed the significant changes regarding medicalization that have evolved and are evidently practiced within the contemporary society today. For instance, changes have occurred within health policies, corporatized medicine, clinical freedom, authority and sovereignty exercised by physicians has reduced as other factors began to grow that gained importance within medical care (Conrad 4). Moreover, the article emphasized
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises and cases
Many situations present the important synchronization of internal versus external negotiations. Many individuals have studied how each side in the negotiation is able to manage the internal opposition to agreements being negotiated. This can also be known as “on the table”, or what exactly is on the line in a heated argument. Each individual involve in an argument has a particular position to be managed, and often times own personal interests are widely expressed. This paper will expand upon the case of Fischer collecting needed funds from Smith with proposals and ideas for a manageable negotiation.
Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. 2nd ed. New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1991. Print.
Whether an author who creates a children’s fantasy book with familiar charterers known to the genre is liable for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 101 when the author or common third party had no access the alleged infringed work and when the protectable elements between the works are not substantially similar.
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY
McCarthy, A. (n.d.). 10 rules of negotiation. Negotiation Skills. Retrieved March 31, 2014, from http://www.negotiation-skills.org
Negotiations styles are scholastically recognized as being broken down into two general categories and those are distributive bargaining styles and integrative negotiation styles. Distributive bargaining styles of negotiation are understood to be a competitive type of negotiation. “Distributive bargaining, also known as positional bargaining, negotiating zero-sum, competitive negotiation, or win-lose negotiation, is a type or style of negotiation in which the parties compete for the distribution of a fixed amount of value” (Business Blog Reviews, 2011). This type of negotiation skill or style approach might be best represented in professional areas such as the stock market where there is a fixed goal in mind or even in a garage sale negotiation where the owner would have a specific value of which he/she would not go below. In contrast, an integrative negotiation approach/style is that of cooperative bargaining, or win-win types ...
Negotiation, as we’ve learned, is the process of communicating where parties can discuss problems and/or targets and attempt to solve them via dialogue in order to reach a resolution. While many individuals feel successful negotiations are due to a natural skill, the truth behind reaching a prime agreement is preparation. You need to know the issue, know yourself, and know your party. This type of preparation also includes knowing your needs and limits, understanding what the other party wants and anticipating their limits, asking the right questions, and being creative in your counteroffers.
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2007). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill/ Irwin.
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin
Negotiation approaches are generally described as either distributive or integrative. At the heart of each strategy is a measurement of conflict between each party’s desired outcomes. Consider the following situation. Chris, an entrepreneur, is starting a new business that will occupy most of his free time for the near future. Living in a fancy new development, Chris is concerned that his new business will prevent him from taking care of his lawn, which has strict requirements under neighborhood rules. Not wanted to upset his neighbors, Chris decides to hire Matt to cut his grass.
This idea allows for justice to be measured by an equation, each person’s share of something must be justified by some relevant difference, making the equation equal. Each person should receive exactly what is proportional to what they put in. If you work an hour longer than someone then you should receive pay for one more hour. This is equal because you are being compensated exactly for the work you put in and the other person is not shorted in any way because they did not work that extra hour therefore should not receive the extra pay. This theory allows for impartiality when making a decision, it is not based on justice because of your moral character or consequence of your action it is based on equal justice for all based
Negotiation has been used as a vital communication tool not only in business but also in social intercourse. It helps people make common agreement and avoid conflict. So we need to use the tactics which we learned from this course and books to do more practice, only in this way we can gain advantages in negotiation.
Coaching is offered to individuals, groups, or organisations and is essentially used to bring out the best in people to enhance their skills with a variety of training methods . The essence of coaching is to evoke people’s potential in order to maximise their performance to...