Critique both the parties neglect each other’s interest and

Critique – Getting to
yes and Getting Past No

Getting to yes

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

order now

How to reach good
agreement, in this Ury and Fisher describes how to reach to an effective
negotiation, mainly when two parties involve in negotiation then the
negotiation often take the form of positional bargaining which is not an
efficient way of doing negotiation because both the parties neglect each
other’s interest and it will harm their relationship in the near future.
Therefore principal negotiation is the way to take forward in which parties
take into consideration each other interest. These principals are

People and issues are treated separately

Give more importance to interests than

Generate various options

Take objective criteria into

In every negotiation
the person and the issues related to negotiation are to be treated separately otherwise
it would hurt the relationship among them. Problems like these arise due to differences
in perception or interpretation of the information provided to them. So rather
than assuming it’s better to clear from other party and have a better
understanding of the information. Second problem is emotions, during a
negotiation it is obvious that there are emotions and feelings are present and
if we try to suppress those emotions of other party then it leads to emotional
outburst, so it’s better to let them express themselves. The third problem is
communication this can arise in cases whether two parties are interacting with
each other or not interacting with each other. So if the parties are
interacting with each other then it’s very important to be a good listener and
should prevent them from blame game.

In negotiation one
should 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 it
that why you have taken that stand . So it’s better to know the interest of
both the parties and then act upon them and each party should focus on each
other interest and come on a common ground. In our third principal we have to
focus on generating options i.e. alternatives. Negotiations is not a win or
lose game it’s all about coming to a solution of the problem and a solution
will only come if we generate lot of alternatives by brainstorming. Parties
should come up with the alternatives which will cost less to them and be more
important to other parties it would create a trust between them and they will
think the same and both party will be equally motivated to come to an
agreement. Now what will parties do if they find their interests in opposite
directions. In this condition they can use objective criteria. Objective
criteria should be well defined and structured. Things that we should keep in
mind while forming the objective criteria- To find the reason behind the other
party suggestion and from their reasoning make your stand.

Now what one will do if
other party is more powerful and in real life these situations are very common
and one need to be ready. Normally what weaker parties do, they decide on a
bottom line prior to the negotiation to make a firewall against other party.
Here comes the concept of BATNA i.e. best alternative to a negotiated
agreement. They should approach the negotiation with open mind without any
bottom line and when they see that the negotiation in failing they should come
up with the alternative that they have and if possible if they know the BATNA
of other party then this can tend the negotiation in favour of them. Entering
into a negotiation without BATNA is like hitting a target blind folded.

What if other party is
not using principal negotiation, thinking of own interest and not showing any
flexibility. In this case the party which is following principal “negotiation
jujitsu”  that means if the other party
is attacking you then instead of counter attacking  change their argument into problem statement and
if they question your point then  take
them as a positive criticism and take feedback and advice from them.  Another approach is one text approach i.e. a
third party should note down the interest of both the parties and take their
viewpoint on them and this process should be repeated until there is no scope
of improvement and then the parties should decide on their stand on the
negotiation. In cases where other party is using unethical way in the
negotiation the party


which is following
principal negotiation should raise the issues openly and must follow their path
and seek for clarification of any issues they think which is unethical.


Getting Past No

In Getting past no the
author throws some light on dealing with parties who are uncooperative and
inflexible. It states that there are reasons of this kind of behaviour and most
probably the reason is that the opponent didn’t know any other way to negotiate
and see dominating as only a single option. So let see the five steps that
author states. The first step is controlling own behaviour, so not to make the
matter worst. Not to take the decision emotionally rather take this situation
as objectively. In this kind of situation always take your time and refrain
yourself from taking instantaneous decision. The second step is to emphasize
him and show your enthusiasm in the negotiation by asking questions and
agreeing 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 step
is, if there is any dispute due to position then find the reason behind those
positions and after finding the interest and keeping those interest intact find
the solution. Fourth step is to allow your opponent to present their own idea
rather than forcing your idea on them and from their idea derive your idea
because its human tendency to oppose other ideas that is why third party
recommendation is also one way to solve these kind of dispute and break the
argument into various part and arrive at each part positively. Author calls
this step as “build then a golden bridge”. 
What if, negotiator is not understanding and rigid in his position? In
Author’s word not accepting the bridge. In this case we should not use power
rather try to educate our opponent and use BATNA. Show them the bright side of
the deal and the values you both will create by entering into this deal.   

So in conclusion I
would like to say that you have to forget about winning or losing and focus on
creating values and generating more options to work on so that both parties can
benefit from them and in the case if one party is weaker than other they should
follow BATNA instead of creating prior bottom line. Rather try to win the deal
try to win your opponent create a trust that it’s not a negotiation or deal
it’s problem solving process in which you two are partners.