Section 4

Garima Narang
Abirami Muthia
Sandeep Kumar




Pre Negotiati on .

the more beneficial will be the final outcome. .The importance of planning is in having a very clear idea before entering into the negotiation i.  Who are the parties directly or potentially involved?  What do they say they want (their positions)?  What are my objectives?  What is the value to be assigned?  What information will influence the final outcome of the negotiation?  What concessions can I make?  How am I going to achieve my objectives?  What part will other people play in the negotiation? Generally. the more time that is spent in planning and preparing for the negotiation.e.

         What exactly do I wish to achieve from this negotiation? Which of my objectives: I must achieve? Do I intend to achieve? Would I like to achieve? What options or alternatives would be acceptable to me? What are the other sides objectives? How does the other side see the negotiation? What is the nature of other party? .

          What is the best deal I could realistically achieve in this negotiation? What is the likely outcome of the negotiation? What is the limit of my authority? At which point should I walk away? What concessions are available to me? What is the cost of each concession and what value does each have to either side? What information do I have that the other side has also? What information do I have that the other side does not have? What information do I need to have before negotiating with the other side? What information does the other side need before it can negotiate with me? .

Compromise. Collaborate. Appeal. you need to work out how you are going to achieve them. Ask yourself the following questions: How am I going to achieve my objectives in this negotiation? What is the strategy of the other side likely to be? What tactics should I use within the negotiation? What tactics are the other side likely to use? Different strategies can be Dominate. Accommodate. It is also useful to try and see the negotiation from the other side and try and work out what their strategy will be. Concede. Once you know your objectives.     Planning your strategy is important in negotiation. and Avoid .

and it is acceptable to you. If the other party is ready to close the deal." or lowest point you will accept in the deal (RV).  If the other party makes the first offer or proposal.  Prepare for the meeting by determining your own motives and objectives: Why are you negotiating? What do you expect to gain and why is it important to you? What do you think you will have to offer to achieve this?  Be prepared with information. comparable prices or costs. Open at the most you can reasonably ask for as this gives you room to negotiate. etc.Some of the basic steps for effectively negotiating a favourable deal or agreement:  Decide on your starting position and your "bottom line. etc. make it easy for them to do as little as possible by having everything ready to sign. Avoid going into any negotiation and coming across as either uninformed or unreasonably aggressive.  Make your arguments and proposals incrementally and strategically.  Plan sequence of proposals and possible counter-proposals. facts. Though some experts suggest that your proposal be the first one on the table.  Know when it is time to close or break off discussion.  Start by discussing a mutually agreed upon point of the negotiation — something both parties will readily say yes to. this can allow you to gauge your response and set the parameters of the negotiation to your advantage. Avoid going immediately to your lowest point of acceptance.  Consider the objectives and emotional motivation of the other party. this tactic can allow the other party to open at a point that is more favourable to you than you may have anticipated. . or bottom-line.

During Negotiation .

. Invent options for mutual gain: In a relaxed atmosphere. security. Negotiation is as much a science as it is an art . Achieve this by showing you genuinely appreciate their interests. not positions: Differences in interests define the real problem. People listen better if they think you understand them and are sympathetic to their interests.1. Interests can include economic well being. with the other side without judging and criticizing the ideas. Focus on interests. 2. Separate the people from the problem: Negotiators are emotional humans with different perspectives and beliefs. The "science" provides a theoretical framework for approaching negotiations. if possible. having control over one's life and a sense of belonging. 4) Insist on objective criteria: Establish fair standards and procedures for evaluating the options that are independent of each negotiator's demands and pressures. 3. Try to build a working relationship with the other negotiators independent of whether your agree or disagree. brainstorm potential solutions among yourselves and.Raiffa 1982.

Before beginning the process. face-to-face or through correspondence? Each of these have multiple advantages and disadvantages and the choice of one over the other should be made on depending on the situation. . WHERE? The place of negotiation is vital towards anchoring the negotiation. neutral territories are best advised. It is vital that the parties have substantial information about the concerned issue and know their expectations.  HOW? Is the process over phone. Another important aspect to consider is the time of the meeting and the provision for handling interruptions. These factors could determine the extent of concentration of the parties involved. Generally. In the case of a diplomatic outcome.  WHEN? Preparation is the key towards an ideal negotiation. This ensures that the customer is comfortable in pursuing a conversation and boost chances of a sale. The manner in which the negotiation process spans depends on the location it takes place. selling takes place at the customer’s place. it is best to warm up and have a round of introductions so that the stage gets set. This will help them identify when to start the negotiation.

If you want to evade a question. Don’t elaborate. Some answers can be postponed on the basis of incomplete knowledge or not remembering. Answers can be given that satisfy part of a question rather than all of it. 3. Quick answers are risky. You may disclose more information than is necessary. They may be foolish.1. 5. . Recognize that some questions do not deserve answers. Correct answers in a negotiation are not necessarily good answers. 9. 7. 2. Make the other party work for answers. When the other person interrupts you. Never answer until you clearly understand the question. 4. 6. provide an answer to a question that was not asked. let them talk. 10. Give yourself the time you need to think. Get them to clarify the question. 8.

. • Ground rules are agreed upon by all participants and not established solely one of the parties • Involved parties must have commitment to implementation of any agreement reached. • Parties are open to informal.  • Parties are willing to share control over processes and the resolution of the dispute with the affected parties. The following list provides recommendations to determine if the parties are ready to participate in a negotiation. • Parties have completed an assessment to determine whether sufficient conditions are in place for negotiations to occur. voluntary and flexible collaborative processes to guide negotiations rather than to overly prescriptive rules.     The major activities in the negotiation step are creating options and securing commitment.

 Paradoxes 1) Claiming value versus creating value: Typically the value creation stage will precede the value claiming stage and the challenge is to balance the emphasis and manage the transition from one stage to the other. 4) Openness versus Closure: This is about being clear on i. The best way to identify their existence is to try and see “what is not there?” One way to uncover intangibles is to ask questions and another way is to take listeners/observers along. 2) Principle Driven versus Resilient Driven : Effective negotiators are thoughtful about the distinction between issues of principle where firmness is essential and issues where compromise and accommodation are the best route to a mutually acceptable outcome.e. 3) Strategy driven versus Opportunity Driven : Strong preparation is necessary to manage this paradox and see if there is an opportunity to move out of one’s strategy in the light of new information that may emerge. Intangible factors These factors often affect negotiation in a negative way and remain out of the negotiator’s awareness. How open and honest should I be with the other party? .

Post Negotiatio n .

A good analysis might address the following       Who controlled the negotiation and how did they do it? What critical issues affected the negotiation process and outcomes? What did you learn about yourself from the negotiation? What did you learn about others behaviour? What did you learn about bargaining and conflict? What would you want to change in the future? How would you alter your behaviour to perform more effectively? .A good analysis is one which steps back from a negotiation identify key events and process.

{Do’s} Failure Because of emotions ….Overall Effectiveness On a scale of 0 to 100 what you will rate? ~ 50 -60% This Issues ….. {Don’ts} .… {what all happened} Success Achieved goals….

      Was your pre-negotiation preparation sufficiently thorough? Did you fully understand your client’s no settlement alternatives? Did you carefully estimate your opponent’s no settlement options? Was your initial objective level high enough? If you obtained everything you required. was this due to the fact you did not establish sufficiently important objectives? Did your pre-bargaining prognostications prove to be accurate? Did your opponent begin near the point you thought they would begin? If not. what caused your miscalculations? Did you use the beginning period to establish rapport with your opponent and to create a positive negotiating environment? Did the Information Stage develop sufficiently to provide needed facts? Who made the first offer? The first “real” offer? Was a “principled” initial offer articulated by you? .

then what would have done differently to produce a different result? . and if so how was this result accomplished? If no settlement was achieved.        What specific bargaining tactics were employed by your opponent and how were these tactics countered by you? Which party made the first compromise and how was it precipitated? Were subsequent concessions made on an alternating basis? Were principled concessions articulated by you or by other party? Did the parties resort to Collaborative Bargaining to maximize their aggregate return? Did either party resort to fraudulent tactics or purposeful misrepresentations to enhance its situation? What finally induced you to accept the terms agreed upon or to reject the final offer made by the other party? Did either party appear to obtain more favorable terms than the other side.

. What common mistakes we do in negotiation e. • Allowing emotions to escalate • Less knowledge of key factors etc.    How to handle alternatives effectively Identify our hot buttons which make you felt pressed by someone Key take away from this negotiation.  Identify our rapport with the other party and its behavior.g.