How to Manage Negotiation - Using Mistakes to Explain - Research Paper Example

Management 19 April How to Manage Negotiation-- Using Mistakes to Explain Introduction: Negotiation is one of the familiar methods generally applied while formulating decisions and handling arguments. “Negotiation is a technique of discussing issues among ourselves and reaching to a conclusion benefiting all involved in the discussion. It is one of the most effective ways to avoid conflicts and tensions. When individuals do not agree with each other, they sit together, discuss issues on an open forum, negotiate with each other and come to an alternative which satisfies all. In a layman’s language it is also termed as bargaining” (An Overview on Negotiation). The purpose of negotiation is to discover the circumstances, and to obtain a solution that is satisfactory to both group. It’s helpful to have uniformity in the employees where distinct kind of person is able to bring about different returns to the business. But this uniformity frequently leads to change of judgment among two workers or two different departments. Conflicts are a part of working situation and as a manager cannot remove the dispute in total; all they could do is to direct them in a manner that it won't influence the level of productivity. Managing Negotiation: Efficiently managed negotiations will leads to agreements and that increases the worth of the organization. Further, they present extremely better profits per investment. On the other hand, unsuccessfully completed negotiations, eventually result in exhausted capital and improved expenses to the organization, creating both the manager and the organization in a difficult where capital effort makes it harder to create the lost position and attain constructive consequences. The faster they manage them, the more the benefits will be for the business if not the conflicts will provide means to destructive performance and lack of group hard work, and as an it causes low output. Mistakes in Negotiation: Negotiation is a hard skill as it needs momentum, in immediately, in the other person's mind and in one’s own. While the managers have to concentrate on positives, it is uniformly significant not to neglect the negative feature of negotiations. There are a set of mistakes that all of us make and we need to be conscious of to be at our most excellent when negotiating. These mistakes happen all the moment. In a number of situations, they occur by mistake. At other instance, some people create these mistakes on intentionally. They overlook conservative understanding and perceptive recommendation and decide to negotiate in a way that brings no success to the negotiation. There are a number of mistakes that negotiators can create and should evade at all costs in order to be a successful negotiator. The two of them are discussed here. 1. Neglecting the Other Side's Problem: A person alone cannot make negotiation the other party is equally involved in it. Therefore, one must take into consideration the other persons interests or problems. The parties should try to place themselves in the other's place. The parties should not merely suppose that their bad doubts will turn out to be the dealings of the other party. They should not accuse the other for the problem. Each party should try to give suggestions which would be pleasing to the other party. “The objective of negotiation is to seek a win – win solution and if win and lose solution happens than you are neglecting the other side’s problem” (Lalitbhojwani). Consider the example of a manager firing one of the employees in the organization. The manager argues and fires the staff for a long time for his low performance, without asking the reasons for his poor performance. According to the employee, he/ she will be some personal or official problems which lead the employee to perform poorly. In this situation, the manager needs to listen carefully to the problems of the employees so that the manager can solve the problem very easily. Considering the opinions of outside parties is useful. By involving the interests of the parties and opening a role playing approach the strongest arguments of the other side can be solved. This mistake can be avoided in the following ways: 1) Understanding other persons view: It is necessary to understand the other person’s position. This will confirm what you imagine the other person means. 2) Listening carefully: It can be done by listening to what the other person says. 3) Establishing concern for the relationships: By concentrating on the problem, it is simple to build and continue the relationship, show an understanding of the other person’s needs and condition. The difficulties related to negotiation are less possible to appear if the parties have a good relationship and consider each others as partners in negotiation rather than as opponent. 2. Letting Price Bulldoze Other Interests: Negotiators who simply pay attention to cost turn potentially optimistic and involves in negative deals. It is significant to recognize that economics is not everything all in negotiations, as there are many competing interests. “Most deals involve interests besides price: A positive working relationship is crucial in longer term deals. The social contract, or ‘spirit of the deal,’ includes goodwill and shared expectations. The deal making process- should be respectful, and fair to both sides Price centric tactics leave these potential joint gains unrealized” (Sebenius). The truth of this mistake is, however, majority of the players reduce proposals that don't allow them share in as a minimum of about 35% to 40% of the bounty-even when much better stakes are included and that the quantity they forfeit is important. At the same time as these refusals are “illogical” on a pure cost basis and almost unintelligible to reverse Midas types, studies explain that when a split feels too uneven to people, they refuse the spoils as inequitable, are offended by the procedure, and possibly try to teach the "greedy" individual a lesson. A real significant actual world message is implanted in these lab results, it includes people care concerning much above the unconditional level of their own economic result; competing interests contain relative outcomes, self-image, perceived fairness, reputation, and so on. Flourishing negotiators, acknowledging that finances aren't all, concentrate on four significant nonprice issues. “People care about much more than the absolute level of their own economic outcome. Competing interests include relative results, perceived fairness, self-image, reputation, and so on. Successful negotiators, acknowledging that economics aren't everything, focus on important non-price factors such as relationships (short and long-term) and the larger interests” (Negotiation Challenges). Less experienced negotiators often underrate the significance of increasing working relations with the extra parties, placing the relations at risk by excessively tough methods or simple neglect. This is particularly true culturally. In much of southern Europe, Latin America and Southeast Asia, relationships more than dealings become the predominant attention in negotiations aiming long term transactions negotiating attention when working out longer term transactions. “Similarly, in setting up a new venture, for example, negotiators tend to focus on the economic contract: equity splits, governance and so on. Yet, often implicitly and often poorly, the parties also negotiate a "social contract", or the "spirit of a deal". Beyond trust and a good working relationship, the social contract includes expectations about the nature, extent and duration of the venture, about process, about the way unforeseen events will be handled, and so on” (Sebenius & Lax).  Negotiators can frequently effect whether cost will dominate or be kept in perspective. Consider negotiations among two industries trying to find an equity joint venture. Among other problems, they try to place a cost on each side's payment to decide ownership shares. A negotiator may drive this procedure down two various paths. Various negotiations are certainly pure cost deals and they are only concerned with aggregate finances. Other than that there is frequently much more to work with. Wise negotiators place the very important issue of cost in viewpoint and don't straitjacket their vision of the wealthier interests at stake. They work with the subjective as well as with to the objective, with the procedure and the connection, with the spirit of a deal or social contract as well as its letter, and with the interests of the parts. Conclusion: Negotiation is a skill which has to be learned, and restored occasionally. Management experts in buying supplying must be that these values are observed is undertaken. The aim of negotiation is to find out the situations, and to find a solution that is satisfactory to both group. It is useful to have consistency in the dealings of workers where the parties will be is able to bring regarding different return to the business. Raising the number of players contained in a negotiation severely raises the difficulty of the circumstances in at least minimum five methods includes computational, informational, social, procedural and strategic methods. The psychological report of negotiation was once a subfield of social psychology, though this is no longer the case. The significant contributions are from social Psychology, cognitive psychology, behavioral decision research and clinical psychology. Furthermore, all these indicate that physiological issues can enhance the understanding of negotiations additionally. We can expect in the future that, the managers & other parties will adopt them in actions. Works Cited An Overview on Negotiation. Management Study Guide. 2008. Web. 19 April 2012. Lalitbhojwani. The Most Common Negotiating Mistakes. Experts Column. 2011. Web. 19 April 2012. Negotiation Challenges. Tero International, Inc. n.d. Web. 19 April 2012. Sebenius, James. & Lax, David. The Art of Getting the Best Deal. FT.com. 2000. Web. 19 April 2012. Sebenius, James. Six Habits of Merely Effective Negotiators. Harvard Business Review. 2001. Web. 19 April 2012. Read More