1

 NEGOTIATION GOALS
 PROCESS OF STRATEGY
DETERMINATION

2
 Strategy is the overall approach for
conducting the negotiation.
 Tactics are particular actions used to
implement a strategy.

3
 Whereas a strategy provides the overall
approach used throughout the negotiation, a
tactic is particular action used at a specific time
during the negotiation to serve a more limited
role or purpose.

4
 Negotiation goals encompass a wide range of
both tangible and intangible desires.
 Categories of goals which in turn affect the
negotiator’s choice of strategy and tactics.

5
 Aggressive goals
 Competitive goals
 Cooperative goals
 Self-centered goals
 Defensive goals
 Combinations of goals

6
 Seeks to undermine, deprive, damage or
otherwise injure a rival or opponent.
Example: Taking a customer or supplier
away from a competitor in order to hurt the
competitor.

7
 Aggressive goals seek to damage an
opponent.

8
 One side seeks to gain more from the negotiation
than the other side.
 In fact the negotiator hopes to obtain as large a
comparative advantage as possible.
Example:
 Receiving the highest possible price.
 Paying the lowest possible price.

9
 A competitive goal means getting more than
the other party.

10
 Cooperative goals are achieved through an
agreement that leads to mutual gain for all
negotiators and their respective sides.
 This achievement is also referred to as
win-win negotiating.
Example: Forming a joint venture, partnership,
or corporation to engage in business
opportunities to achieve a mutual profit.

11
 With cooperative goals, agreement leads to
mutual gain.

12
 Self-centered goals are those that depend solely
on what one’s own side achieves.
 Scenario: two large accounting firms merge. The
tremendous size of the new firm raises a self centered
goal to find sufficient prestigious space in a single
location. The goal is reached when the new firm
negotiates a lease for 15 floors in a major midtown New
York office building.

13
 Self-centered goals seek a particular result
regardless of what the other side receives.

14
 One seeks to avoid a particular outcome.
 Examples:
 Avoiding a loss of respect.
 Preventing a strike.
 Avoiding the loss of a customer or
supplier.

15
 Defensive goals seek to avoid a particular
result.

16
 Each negotiation usually has multiple goals.
 Case: In a collective bargaining negotiation, a
transportation firm seeks to have its employees
make prompt deliveries in order to maintain its
business volume. This is a self-centered goal. A
defensive goal is suggested if the maintenance of
volume is intended to avoid a loss of customers.
The goal is also aggressive to the extent that the
same activity lures new customers away from
competitors, a result which is likely to weaken
the latter.

17
 Strategies are chosen for
use in a particular
negotiation in order to
achieve your side’s goals.
The nature of those goals
will affect the choice of
strategy or strategies.
 A variety of factors
determine the best
strategy for a negotiating
situation.

18
 The choice of strategy also may be affected by
the answers to a number of questions, such as:
 Does the negotiation involve a transaction or a
dispute?
 Is there more than one issue involved?
 Can new issues be introduced into the
negotiation?
 Are the parties’ interests short-term or
long-term?
 Are the parties’ relationships long-term, limited
to one negotiation or some where in between?
19
20
MAIN NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES
• AVOIDANCE STRATEGY
• COMPETITIVE STRATEGY
• COLLABORATIVE STRATEGY
• ACCOMMODATIVE STRATEGY

21
22
 THE DUAL CONCERNS MODEL
 How much concern does the actor have for
achieving the substantive outcomes at stake
in this negotiation?
(substantive goals)
 How much concern does the negotiator have
for the current and future quality of the
relationship with the other party?
(relationship goals)

23
24
 Reasons of why negotiators might
choose not to negotiate:
1. If one is able to meet one’s needs without
negotiating at all, it may make sense to use an
avoidance strategy.

2. It simply may not be worth the time and effort

to negotiate.

25
3. The decision to negotiate is closely related to
the desirability of available alternatives.
Alternatives are the outcomes that can be
achieved if negotiations don’t work out
4. Avoidance may be appropriate when the
negotiator is responsible for developing others
into becoming better negotiators.

26
 Competition
 Collaboration
 Accommodation

27
 Distributive Bargaining
 Win-Lose Bargaining (I win, you lose)

Zero-sum game: whatever extent one party

wins something, the other party losses

28
 Distributive Bargaining refers to the process of
dividing or distributing scarce resources

 Two parties have different but interdependent

goals
 There is a clear conflict of interests

29
The essence of
Distributive
Bargaining is who
gets what share of
fixed pie.

30
 A wage negotiation
 A price negotiation
 A boundary or
territorial
negotiation

31
32
33
 Integrative Bargaining
 Win-Win Bargaining (I win, you win)

Positive-sum situations are those where

each party gains without a corresponding loss
for the other party.

34
The law of win/win says “Let’s not do it your way
or my way; let’s do it the best way”
Greg Anderson
The 22 Non-negotiable
Ways of Wellness

Integrative Bargaining is about searching for common

solutions to problems that are not exclusively of interest
to only one of the negotiators.

35
 Separate people from the problem
 Focus on interests, not positions
 Invent options for mutual gains
 Insist on using objective criteria

36
37
 Win-lose strategy (I lose, you win)
 The negotiator wants to let the other win, keep
the other happy, or not to endanger the
relationship by pushing hard to
achieve some goal on the
substantive issues

38
 Accommodative Strategy is often used;
 When the primary goal of the exchange is to
build or strengthen the relationship and the
negotiator is willing to sacrifice the outcome.
 If the negotiator expects the relationship to
extend past a single negotiation episode.

39
 “In a successful negotiation, everyone wins. The
objective should be agreement, not victory."

 “The key to successful negotiation is to shift the

situation to a "win-win" even if it looks like a "win-
lose" situation. Almost all negotiations have at least
some elements of win-win. Successful negotiations
often depend on finding the win-win aspects
in any situation. Only shift to a win-lose mode if all
else fails.”
Professor E. Wertheim,
College of Business Administration,
Northeastern University
40
1. No-Concessions
2. No Further Concessions
3. Making Only Deadlock-Breaking Concessions
4. High Realistic Expectations With Systematic
Concessions
5. Concede First
6. Problem Solving
7. Goals Other Than To Reach Agreement
8. Moving For Closure
9. Combining Strategies

41
 NO-CONCESSIONS
 NO FURTHER CONCESSIONS
 MAKING ONLY DEADLOCK-BREAKING
CONCESSIONS

42
 A No-Concessions Strategy is tough and
dangerous, since concessions usually are
expected.

 With a no-concessions strategy, the

negotiation becomes a unilateral process.

43
 A no-concessions strategy is suitable for
aggressive, competitive and self-centered
goals.
 A no-concessions strategy is not suitable for
cooperative and defensive goals.

44
 When the balance of power is strongly in
your favor.
 When you are in a disproportionately weak
position.
 When the dollar amount is too low or time
is too short.
1) Cost Efficiency
2) Available Time

45
 When the same terms must be available to
everyone.
 When bids or written proposals are sought
 When another party is waiting in the wings.

46
 Might preclude an
agreement the terms of
which, although less
favorable, are still
acceptable.
 A strategy shift away
from no concessions
might be read as a
failed attempt at
bluffing, a position to
be avoided.

47
 Avoid inadvertent bluffs by rashly
miscalculating the use of this strategy.
 It may also be helpful to accompany the
demand with reasons why your side is
notin a position to offer anything else,
and to explain how the demand is fair.

48
1. Appeal to a higher level of authority in an attempt
to change the party’s position.
2. Ignore it and proceed as if concessions are possible.
3. Present cost saving or win-win measures that justfy
a concession.
4. As a seller, offer less (such as fewer services),
thereby effectively increasing the price.
5. As a buyer, demand more, thereby, in effect,
reducing the price.
6. Terminate the negotiating session.

49
A No-Further-Concessions Strategy is
possible when the other party can be forced
to make the final concession, or when the
situation has changed.

50
 The no-further-concessions strategy is
implemented after some concessions have been
made.
 The countermeasures to this strategy are the
same as those for its parent, the no-concessions
strategy.

51
 A strategy of Making Only Deadlock-
Breaking Concessions is okay when the risk
of no agreement is acceptable.
 A deadlock is an impasse or standstill, a
state of inaction resulting from the
opposition of equally powerful
uncompromising parties.

52
 The strategy of making a concession only to
break deadlock is the next toughest strategy
after the no-concession strategy.
 This strategy generates an atmosphere of
tension and difficulty. Because of this one
should be very careful to use this strategy.

53
  A making only deadlock-breaking concessions
strategy is viable for aggressive, competitive and
self-centered goals.
 A making only deadlock-breaking
concessions strategy is inappropriate for
cooperative and defensive goals.

54
 HIGH REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS WITH
SMALL SYSTEMATIC CONCESSIONS
 CONCEDE FIRST
 PROBLEM SOLVING

55
 It is the strategy of combining high, realistic
expectations with small, systematic
concessions
 It entails a planned approach both to the
objectives of the negotiation and to the
compromises that may be employed to
reach those objectives
“Strategy which achieves the
best results”

56
 It has three components:
 The size of the concessions
 The use of apparent concessions which
actually involve no cost to the negotiator’s
side
 The advance planning of concessions

57
 Small concessions depends on:
- the value of that which is being negotiated
while the negotiation begins
- the value which is put during the negotiation
 Small concessions after big concessions

 Advance planning helps to maximize one’s

results and minimize the pressure to merely

respond to the other negotiator’s actions

58
 It is used to reduce tension, create an
atmosphere conducive to reaching an
agreement and allow one to demand a
reciprocal concession
 “We made an important concession at the
outset of this meeting and you still have not
given us anything significant in return”
 Difficult and sometimes impossible to
withdraw a concession

59
 It is suitable to apply this strategy when the
position of negotiator is too weak
 It can be used in rare circumstances when any
real negotiation may lead the other party to
discover information that will harm the
negotiator’s client
 It is used to achieve competitive, self-centered,
or defensive goals, depending on the
specific context of negotiation

60
 It is a strategy for creating a procedural
agreement to solve a common problem that
has been identified
 It is the most useful strategy after HRESSC
 It is different from other concession-based
strategies which center on giving up or
refusing something of value

61
 It focuses on creating a procedural agreement
that the negotiators will work together to
discover and identify problems that are
preventing agreement and to determine
whether any common interests can be used to
resolve those problems
 It is described in game theory as a
“win-win” strategy

62
1) A procedural agreement to use problem
solving
2) Identification of the problem preventing
agreement
3) Determination of any common interests and
limiting seperate needs
4) Discussion to discover fair, mutually beneficial
solutions

63
 There must be an agreement by the parties and
negotiators to work together to identify the
problems preventing agreement, and to formulate a
mutually advantageous solution
 To ensure good faith, the parties must have a
mutual interest in solving the particular problems
in the same way
 The negotiators must identify the same problems
and agree on how to define them
 Parties and negotiators must realize that a win-win
solution is possible and that problems will not be
solved by one side yielding to other. Instead the
participants will strive to create a previously
unconsidered, mutually beneficial solution

64
 Achieving a clear distinction between
objectives and needs
 Maintaining attitudes of empathy and
cooperativeness
 The related roles of creativity and patience in
problem solving

65
 Keeping the focus on mutual
interests
Outside forces to avoid:
o Government action
o A jury or a judge deciding the facts at trial so that one
side wins totally while the other side loses totally
o A competitor gaining an advantage
o The expiration of a financing commitment

66
 Broadening the pie and trading concessions
across issues
It may be useful to consider the distribution of
resources in terms of:
 What will be distributed
 When it will be distributed
 By whom it will be distributed
 How it will be distributed
 How much will be distributed

67
 Brainstorming
Brainstorming for problem solving is a
process which requires that the participants:
 Speak spontaneously or think out loud (as
long it is relevant and constructive)
 Retrain from evaluating or criticizing the
statements of others until after all initial ideas are
elicited
 Be willing to repeat one’s ideas if others want to
hear them again
 Persist in the effort even if there is a prolonged
silence

68
 GOALS OTHER THAN TO REACH
AGREEMENT
 MOVING FOR CLOSURE
 COMBINING STRATEGIES

69
 Real purpose of a negotiation is to reach an
agreement
 But in this strategy it is NOT
 Be careful-An exercise in gamesmanship
 With cooperative goals

70
1. A strategy to delay
For eg: a negotiation team is sure that union’ll
strike in all conditions. But the team believe that
they’ll soften and a delay‘ll harm seasonal tasks.

71
2. To gather
information
3. Negotiating as a
forum for
expressing views

72
4 . Negotiating to influence a third party
 Public
 Management of the entity
! Influence of 3rd parties on negotiation is
very important
Powerful people or groups, family members, etc

73
To finalize a particular issue or the
overall negotiation rather than
risk losing the available terms.

74
A difficult dilemma between
 Risk of losing an agreement

 The opportunity of doing better

and balancing by evaluating those:

* Value * Potential
* Risk * Odds

75
! In negotiations the most important risk is
losing an available deal that your clients
may accept
! To avoid this, the ultimate decision should
be made by decision maker

76
 A proposal should be close to other
party’s bottom-line
 Other party should believe
 No further concession is possible
 Failing to accept may result in no
agreement
 Closure is more advantageous

77
 Expressing understanding that agreement
exists
 Concession-based inducement to close
 Minimizing the danger of cancellation between
closure and execution
 Closing issues within a larger negotiation

78
 Generally usage of a
single strategy isn’t
efficient
For e.g.: first concession and
moving for closure are
efficient in specific parts of
the negotiation

79
 Tried and failed strategies may
be changed
 Changing strategies may be

the main strategy

80
 Sequential changes

 Issue-oriented changes

81
 A purchaser has a
 competitive goal of getting lowest price for
machinery,and
 a self-centered goal of good service production
For 1st one, HRESSC and for 2nd one problem
solving strategies are chosen.

82
 What is important is:
If the negotiator doesn’t do the change secretly,
this change should be clearly defined not to
harm trustworthiness.

83
  You cannot shake hands with a clenched fist.
Indira Gandhi

[ Clenched Fist - Woodblock by Frank Cieciorka, 1965 ]

84
 THANKS FOR
YOUR ATTENTION

85