Getting To Yes Negotiating An Agreement Without Giving In

The principles-based method of negotiation was developed in The Harvard Program on the Negotiation of Fisher, Ury and Patton. [6] Its aim is to reach an agreement without compromising trade relations. [7] The method is based on five proposals:[8] In negotiations, the parties must resist the urge to constantly compromise for fear of losing the negotiations altogether. Such compromises may allow for a shorter negotiation, but also leave the main party with an agreement that has not fully benefited them. The definition of a “lower line” may protect the negotiator`s final offer, but it may limit the ability to learn from the negotiations and exclude any new negotiations that could eventually result in a better benefit to all parties involved. When considering final decisions, each party can take a step backwards and consider all possible alternatives to the current offer. An example in the book describes a house on the market: if the house was not sold, one should compare with the possibility of selling the house to make sure that the best decision is made. [8] As early as 1965, Walton and McKersies clearly articulated the study of the theory of negotiation lab theory, which they called “integrative quarrels,” with tactics such as mutual understanding of the problem, exchange of information, mutual trust and the search for the best alternative. Sounds familiar? The path to Yes did not recognize walton and McKersie`s book, although all the books I`ve read about collective bargaining do.

If you can say yes, the phrase becomes be gentle on people and the problem. For example, Walton and McKersie quoted Mr. Gandhi: Be harsh on antagonism and gentle on antagonists. Thank you for everything you`ve done – and share it so openly. I am not sure there is a name for that, but I use a technique that seems very useful when I help groups negotiate agreements, that is, to start testing simple agreements, and then gradually move towards more ambitious agreements. It could be with “So I`ve heard that we all believe we`re going to solve this problem. Is that right? I think it is helpful because it indicates that we agree on some points, that we are making progress and that we are moving towards a solution. It is also useful because it helps me to understand where the divergence and convergence is, so that I can better concentrate the negotiations.

We tend to start our negotiations by defining our views. For example, an owner might say to a developer, “I don`t allow you to develop this property.” If we are in fixed positions, we are getting ourselves into a bind. In our goal, yes, to achieve, we must identify the interests that underlie our opponent`s positions, asking questions like.B. “Why is this quality important to them?” By seizing the interests that motivate the other party and sharing your own interests, you can open up the possibility of exploring trade-offs between topics and increasing your chances, yes, of coming.

Close
Menu
Social profiles