Critique both the parties neglect each other’s interest and

Critique – Getting toyes and Getting Past NoGetting to yesHow to reach goodagreement, in this Ury and Fisher describes how to reach to an effectivenegotiation, mainly when two parties involve in negotiation then thenegotiation often take the form of positional bargaining which is not anefficient way of doing negotiation because both the parties neglect eachother’s interest and it will harm their relationship in the near future.Therefore principal negotiation is the way to take forward in which partiestake into consideration each other interest.

These principals are1)      People and issues are treated separately2)      Give more importance to interests thanposition3)      Generate various options4)      Take objective criteria intoconsideration      In every negotiationthe person and the issues related to negotiation are to be treated separately otherwiseit would hurt the relationship among them. Problems like these arise due to differencesin perception or interpretation of the information provided to them. So ratherthan assuming it’s better to clear from other party and have a betterunderstanding of the information. Second problem is emotions, during anegotiation it is obvious that there are emotions and feelings are present andif we try to suppress those emotions of other party then it leads to emotionaloutburst, so it’s better to let them express themselves. The third problem iscommunication this can arise in cases whether two parties are interacting witheach other or not interacting with each other.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

So if the parties areinteracting with each other then it’s very important to be a good listener andshould prevent them from blame game.In negotiation oneshould focus on interest rather that position and this is our second principal,a position is a stand that you have taken and interest is the reason behind itthat why you have taken that stand . So it’s better to know the interest ofboth the parties and then act upon them and each party should focus on eachother interest and come on a common ground. In our third principal we have tofocus on generating options i.e. alternatives.

Negotiations is not a win orlose game it’s all about coming to a solution of the problem and a solutionwill only come if we generate lot of alternatives by brainstorming. Partiesshould come up with the alternatives which will cost less to them and be moreimportant to other parties it would create a trust between them and they willthink the same and both party will be equally motivated to come to anagreement. Now what will parties do if they find their interests in oppositedirections. In this condition they can use objective criteria. Objectivecriteria should be well defined and structured. Things that we should keep inmind while forming the objective criteria- To find the reason behind the otherparty suggestion and from their reasoning make your stand.Now what one will do ifother party is more powerful and in real life these situations are very commonand one need to be ready. Normally what weaker parties do, they decide on abottom line prior to the negotiation to make a firewall against other party.

Here comes the concept of BATNA i.e. best alternative to a negotiatedagreement. They should approach the negotiation with open mind without anybottom line and when they see that the negotiation in failing they should comeup with the alternative that they have and if possible if they know the BATNAof other party then this can tend the negotiation in favour of them. Enteringinto a negotiation without BATNA is like hitting a target blind folded.

What if other party isnot using principal negotiation, thinking of own interest and not showing anyflexibility. In this case the party which is following principal “negotiationjujitsu”  that means if the other partyis attacking you then instead of counter attacking  change their argument into problem statement andif they question your point then  takethem as a positive criticism and take feedback and advice from them.  Another approach is one text approach i.

e. athird party should note down the interest of both the parties and take theirviewpoint on them and this process should be repeated until there is no scopeof improvement and then the parties should decide on their stand on thenegotiation. In cases where other party is using unethical way in thenegotiation the party  which is followingprincipal negotiation should raise the issues openly and must follow their pathand seek for clarification of any issues they think which is unethical. Getting Past NoIn Getting past no theauthor throws some light on dealing with parties who are uncooperative andinflexible. It states that there are reasons of this kind of behaviour and mostprobably the reason is that the opponent didn’t know any other way to negotiateand see dominating as only a single option. So let see the five steps thatauthor states. The first step is controlling own behaviour, so not to make thematter worst.

Not to take the decision emotionally rather take this situationas objectively. In this kind of situation always take your time and refrainyourself from taking instantaneous decision. The second step is to emphasizehim and show your enthusiasm in the negotiation by asking questions andagreeing to their problem. Use positive words like “yes” instead of “but”, “we”instead of “me” so that it will create a sense of trust in his mind. Third stepis, if there is any dispute due to position then find the reason behind thosepositions and after finding the interest and keeping those interest intact findthe solution. Fourth step is to allow your opponent to present their own idearather than forcing your idea on them and from their idea derive your ideabecause its human tendency to oppose other ideas that is why third partyrecommendation is also one way to solve these kind of dispute and break theargument into various part and arrive at each part positively. Author callsthis step as “build then a golden bridge”. What if, negotiator is not understanding and rigid in his position? InAuthor’s word not accepting the bridge.

In this case we should not use powerrather try to educate our opponent and use BATNA. Show them the bright side ofthe deal and the values you both will create by entering into this deal.    So in conclusion Iwould like to say that you have to forget about winning or losing and focus oncreating values and generating more options to work on so that both parties canbenefit from them and in the case if one party is weaker than other they shouldfollow BATNA instead of creating prior bottom line.

Rather try to win the dealtry to win your opponent create a trust that it’s not a negotiation or dealit’s problem solving process in which you two are partners.   NILESH SINGHP-161033PGDM18GREAT LAKES INSTITUTEOF MANAGEMENT, GURGAON