Going into this process, my initial strategy was to remain as objective as possible, while still seeking out my best interest, as well as keeping the children in mind. Deciding what I would need, as well as what the children would need was a major factor in this negotiation. But, I also had the intention of keeping things fair, seeing as though the marriage had existed for 20+ years, and that Jim deserved his fair share as much as I did. According to an article from the Harvard Program on Negotiations, this negotiation style could be described as mostly cooperative, with a small amount of individualistic tendencies (Staff, 2018). While I was focused on keeping things fair and objective, I also was looking out for myself, aiming to get what I needed to continue living as a co-parent. …show more content…
This was my intent upon entering the proceedings, and for the most part, I stuck to it; looking out for myself and the children, but also trying to keep a clear head by allowing assets to be divided in such a way that both Jim and I felt satisfied with the outcome.
Throughout the process I noticed myself utilizing a few different types of strategies as my opponent employed his own tactics. At any point I was employing a combination of collaborative, accommodating, or compromising behaviors. But towards the end, as things started to get a little heated, my personal style was leaning towards a competitive style (Green, 2016). As my opponent started getting more and more selfish, coming up with very unrealistic demands, I found myself exhibiting a more individualistic motive, rather than the compromising attitude I entered the negotiation
with. My opponent, while extremely flexible, failed to realize that he could not get both ends and the middle. In the beginning of the negotiation, we had agreed on multiple things, such as what to do with certain assets including the various all-terrain vehicles and other miscellaneous items, as well as the home. But as time went on, it appeared that while I was more than willing to hear his demands, he appeared to be locked into his ways. Although he spoke things that made some believe that he may have had an altruistic or even an accommodating attitude, but what he was demanding portrayed a very individualistic and competitive motive (Shonk, 2018). While I started out high with my child support requests, I listened carefully to the mediator, and made relatively large edits to my requests, edits that put my opponent in a relatively better position. But as time went on, he dismissed multiple tips from the mediator, and only increased his demands. Ultimately, I think that our personalities and emotions came to the forefront, (Horton, 2018), my opponent has a relatively outgoing and competitive personality, which I think ultimately led to his ever-increasing demands. Whereas I am typically more conservative and reserved, not usually letting my emotions cloud my judgement. But because I felt as though I had already given up so much, and he kept wanting more, this led me to making petty demands only to get more and more from my opponent. Overall, I think that this process was a very eye-opening experience. Even though we were just conducting this as a class experience, and we had no emotional involvement with each other, I still felt personally invested in this process. It allowed me to see just how difficult it is to essentially turn one life into two in a relatively short amount of time. Many things that were so important previously, have no value when negotiations fail, and a case is turned over to a judge for separation. So, my opinion stands, if court can be avoided, that would be the best option for all parties involved, except the attorneys of course.
My negotiation style questionnaire indicated that my negotiation style was collaborating and accommodating. In addition, I will not avoid negotiation. I felt the result was reasonable because I like negotiation and have never avoided negotiation when I have a chance. I always try to enlarge the size of the pie to be negotiated. However, the class taught me I sometimes accommodated too much and missed a chance to create value in the end. One of the reasons is that I am afraid of getting nothing and overly cautious. This leads me to compromise before maximizing the pie. I believe I can take more risks to create value.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2011). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. ISBN-13: 9780073530369
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY
The most common form of negotiation depends on the taking and subsequent relinquishing of a position. A typical example of this type of negotiation would be the classic scene of a merchant in a bazaar, haggling with a potential customer. Each holding fast to some ideal thought of a price for a bobble, neither willing to budge. This type of negotiation, according to the text, can produce "unwise agreements" and is also labeled as "inefficient" as both sides tend to dig in. This lack of headway relates directly to ego, and pride as it locks all participants in. They can neither back off nor change position for fear of "losing face" and embarrassment. This type of bargaining can become even more complicated if there are more than two participating parties.
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 ...
The first common theme is the importance of clear strategic intent and big picture thinking in negotiations. Before taking the Negotiation Behaviour unit, I always perceived negotiation as a fixed-pie, a zero-sum gain situation, where one party wins and the other party loses. This belief has often led me to a competitive behaviour in negotiation by trading the big picture thinking with the need to win, getting too detailed too quickly, leading to a positional approach instead of having a broad goal and explore for ways around problems to create value and get the best outcome.
Good preparation allows you to strategize with the ability to think quickly in the negotiation room. There are several different formats and styles of negotiations. The use of a certain style depends on elements such as the strength of the relationship, the urgency of the situation, the intricacy of the issues, and the content of the negotiation. Each format and style has its own strengths and weaknesses and can be strategically used in various types of situations. As mentioned, the preparation of a successful negation is necessary, especially concerning your BATNA. We have been able to explore such preparation and methods by participating and conducting negotiations with our peers. The following negotiation studies proved to have their own dynamic, thus accounting for a different preparation and negotiation tactic for each.
Negotiation by Harvard Business Essentials describes negotiations as having two primary types, distributive, and integrative (Harvard Business Essentials, 2003, p. 2). In distributive negotiation parties contend over a fixed amount of value; when one takes more, the other takes less. In integrative negotiation both parties are trying to find a maximum value between each other with the goal of creating maximum benefit for both parties. Through the paperclip trade up I have learned that many negotiations are a blend of distribution and integration. While I look to maximize my benefit, I also need to maintain and create a relationship with the other party.
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2007). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill/ Irwin.
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.
Negotiating styles are grouped into five types; Competing, Collaborating, Comprising, Avoidance, and Accommodating (Colburn, 2010). Even though it is possible to exhibit different parts of the five types of negation styles in different situations, can see that my tendencies seem to default to, Compromise and Accommodating. In reviewing the course work and reviewing my answers for Questionnaire 1 and 5, I find that the data reflects the same assumption. The accommodating profile is one where relationship perseveration is everything and giving what the other side wants is the route to winning people over. Accommodators are well liked by their colleagues and opposite party negotiators (Colburn, 2010). When analyzing my accommodating tenancy in negations, I find often it is easier to give into the demands when they are within a reasonable range. I often consider it the part of providing a high level of customer service. It has been my experience that continued delaying and not coming to an agreement in a topic will only shorten the window in which you will have to meet the request since. The cons to this style are by accommodating highly competitive styles the accommodator can give up to much ground in the process. “Giving away value too easily too early can signal to your negotiation counterpart that you've very deep pockets, and your gift is just a taster of bigger and better gifts to come”. The other negations type I default to is compromising. Compromising “often involves splitting the difference; usually resulting in an end position of about half way between both parties’ opening positions” (Colburn, 2010). In the absence of a good rationale or balanced exchanged concessions, half way betwee...
Negotiation occurs almost every day in our personal and professional life. Having superior negotiation skills can be critical to the success in our personal and professional life. This essay will illustrate the negotiation style, the planning and the execution of my negotiation skills. I planned on using my negotiation skill on reducing the cost of monthly rent for the apartment. After the reading from Negotiating for Success: Essential Strategies and Skills by George Siedel, one gains success through initiating and stirring the process, and excepting there to be room for change. So, off I set to meet the landlord to negotiate a new price for the monthly rent agreement on the Lease
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.
...w to apply these tactics into practice. Understanding the meaning of each tactics is just the first stage, flexibility in the use of appropriate tactics in future issues is more important. Besides, I need to make a detailed plan before the negotiation. Firstly, analyzing the interests, perspectives and weak points of the opposite side and selecting suitable tactics. Secondly, preparing several response strategies will help me to control the situations. Thirdly, setting the minimum level what I can agree on the issue is also essential part of negotiation.
A typical morning for me when i was 15 was not only trying to get myself ready to walk a long distance to school, but to prepare my two little sisters for their school. I was only 11 years old when my dad left us(mom and siblings). Ever since my dad left us I had to face a lot of challenges knowing that since that moment my life had changed. When my dad left i ended up taking a lot of responsibly at a young age. I started working and wanted to help my mom. We got to a point where we became homeless and i missed a lot of school. When my dad left he took everything and the house my parents were paying was way too much for my mom to pay by herself because is was working in the fields picking fruits. When we were homeless we had to go back to mexico