resourceone.info Fiction Negotiating For Dummies Pdf

NEGOTIATING FOR DUMMIES PDF

Sunday, October 27, 2019


Trademarks: Wiley, the Wiley Publishing logo, For Dummies, the Dummies Man .. book that would eventually become Negotiating For Dummies and to find. Negotiating For Dummies [Donaldson, David Frohnmayer] on resourceone.info * FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. People who can't or won't negotiate on their . Negotiation is the process of evolving communication to get from opposition to consensus, manage conflict and reach agreement. ▫ Negotiation principles apply.


Negotiating For Dummies Pdf

Author:HILDEGARD FULLFORD
Language:English, Spanish, Hindi
Country:New Zealand
Genre:Health & Fitness
Pages:215
Published (Last):16.07.2016
ISBN:586-9-65057-136-5
ePub File Size:21.34 MB
PDF File Size:10.88 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Regsitration Required]
Downloads:49383
Uploaded by: SHONTA

People who can't or won't negotiate on their own behalf run the risk of paying too much, earning too little, and always feeling like they're getting gypped. Successful negotiation requires compromise from both sides. Both parties the power of your negotiating skills or the compelling force of your logic. This is not. Identify and discuss individual sources of negotiating strength. Practice skills that can influence the outcome of the negotiation. Develop an awareness of the.

Types of negotiators[ edit ] Three basic kinds of negotiators have been identified by researchers involved in The Harvard Negotiation Project. These types of negotiators are: soft bargainers, hard bargainers, and principled bargainers. Soft These people see negotiation as too close to competition, so they choose a gentle style of bargaining.

The offers they make are not in their best interests, they yield to others' demands, avoid confrontation, and they maintain good relations with fellow negotiators. Their perception of others is one of friendship, and their goal is agreement. They do not separate the people from the problem, but are soft on both. They avoid contests of wills and insist on agreement, offering solutions and easily trusting others and changing their opinions.

Hard These people use contentious strategies to influence, utilizing phrases such as "this is my final offer" and "take it or leave it. They see others as adversaries and their ultimate goal is victory.

Additionally, they search for one single answer, and insist you agree on it. They do not separate the people from the problem as with soft bargainers , but they are hard on both the people involved and the problem. Principled Individuals who bargain this way seek integrative solutions, and do so by sidestepping commitment to specific positions.

They focus on the problem rather than the intentions, motives, and needs of the people involved. They separate the people from the problem, explore interests, avoid bottom lines, and reach results based on standards independent of personal will.

They base their choices on objective criteria rather than power, pressure, self-interest, or an arbitrary decisional procedure. These criteria may be drawn from moral standards, principles of fairness, professional standards, and tradition.

Researchers from The Harvard Negotiation Project recommend that negotiators explore a number of alternatives to the problems they face in order to reach the best solution, but this is often not the case as when you may be dealing with an individual using soft or hard bargaining tactics Forsyth, Tactics[ edit ] Tactics are always an important part of the negotiating process.

More often than not they are subtle, difficult to identify and used for multiple purposes. Tactics are more frequently used in distributive negotiations and when the focus in on taking as much value off the table as possible.

Below are a few commonly used tactics. Auction: The bidding process is designed to create competition. When people know that they may lose out on something, they want it even more. Not only do they want the thing that is being bid on, they also want to win, just to win. Taking advantage of someone's competitive nature can drive up the price. Brinksmanship: One party aggressively pursues a set of terms to the point where the other negotiating party must either agree or walk away.

Brinkmanship is a type of "hard nut" approach to bargaining in which one party pushes the other party to the "brink" or edge of what that party is willing to accommodate. Successful brinksmanship convinces the other party they have no choice but to accept the offer and there is no acceptable alternative to the proposed agreement. Chicken: Negotiators propose extreme measures, often bluffs, to force the other party to chicken out and give them what they want.

This tactic can be dangerous when parties are unwilling to back down and go through with the extreme measure. Defence in Depth: Several layers of decision-making authority is used to allow further concessions each time the agreement goes through a different level of authority.

Deadlines: Give the other party a deadline forcing them to make a decision. This method uses time to apply pressure to the other party. Deadlines given can be actual or artificial. Flinch: Flinching is showing a strong negative physical reaction to a proposal. Common examples of flinching are gasping for air, or a visible expression of surprise or shock.

The flinch can be done consciously or unconsciously. The "good guy" appears more reasonable and understanding, and therefore, easier to work with.

In essence, it is using the law of relativity to attract cooperation. The "good guy" appears more agreeable relative than the "bad guy. The theory is that the extreme offer makes the other party reevaluate their own opening offer and move close to the resistance point as far as you are willing to go to reach an agreement.

A danger of this tactic is that the opposite party may think negotiating is a waste of time. The Nibble: Nibbling is asking for proportionally small concessions that haven't been discussed previously just before closing the deal.

Mirroring: When people get on well, the outcome of a negotiation is likely to be more positive. To create trust and a rapport, a negotiator may mimic or mirror the opponent's behavior and repeat what they say.

Mirroring refers to a person repeating the core content of what another person just said, or repeating a certain expression. It indicates attention to the subject of negotiation and acknowledges the other party's point or statement.

Main article: Nonverbal communication Communication is a key element of negotiation. Effective negotiation requires that participants effectively convey and interpret information. Participants in a negotiation communicate information not only verbally but non-verbally through body language and gestures.

Negotiating For Dummies, 2nd Edition

By anchoring one's position, one establishes the position from which the negotiation proceeds. In a like manner, one can "anchor" and gain advantage with nonverbal body language cues. Personal space : The person at the head of the table is the apparent symbol of power.

Negotiators can negate this strategic advantage by positioning allies in the room to surround that individual. First impression : Begin the negotiation with positive gestures and enthusiasm. Look the person in the eye with sincerity. If you cannot maintain eye contact, the other person might think you are hiding something or that you are insincere. Who might supply a piece missing from the current process?

Who might minimize the costs of production or distribution?

This process will identify all the actual and potential parties and crucial relationships among them, such as who influences whom, who defers to whom, who owes what to whom. Example: When WebTV Networks was launching, founder Steve Perlman obtained seed funding, developed the technology, created a prototype, and hired his core team. But in order to turn the start-up into a self-sustaining company, he needed more capital and broader capabilities.

So he identified potential partners in many fields: Internet service providers, content providers, consumer-electronics businesses, manufacturers, distributors. Map Backward and Sequence The logic of backward mapping is similar to project management: You begin with the end point and work back to the present to develop a critical path.

Then, determine who must sign on to make your vision a reality.

Often, approaching the most difficult—and most critical—partners first offers slim chances for a deal. Instead, figure out which partners you need to have on board before you initiate negotiations with your most crucial partners. He knew that VCs were skeptical of consumer electronics deals, so he mapped backward from his VC target. Since VCs would be more apt to fund his company if a prominent consumer electronics company were already on board, he first forged a deal with Phillips and then used that deal to sign up Sony, as well.

When he finally approached VCs, he was able to negotiate new venture money at a higher valuation. Manage Information Flow How you tailor your message to each potential partner can dramatically alter the outcome of your negotiation. Timing is vital: Decide which stages of the negotiation process should be public, which private, and how much information from one stage you should convey at other stages.

What stands between you and the yes you want? Each dimension is crucial, but many negotiators and much of the negotiation literature fixate on only the first two. The Three Dimensions of Negotiation For instance, most negotiation books focus on how executives can master tactics—interactions at the bargaining table.

So the books offer useful tips on reading body language, adapting your style to the bargaining situation, listening actively, framing your case persuasively, deciding on offers and counteroffers, managing deadlines, countering dirty tricks, avoiding cross-cultural gaffes, and so on.

Does some sort of trade between sides make sense and, if so, on what terms? Should it be a staged agreement, perhaps with contingencies and risk-sharing provisions? A deal with a more creative concept and structure? One that meets ego needs as well as economic ones? Beyond the interpersonal and deal design challenges executives face in 1-D and 2-D negotiations lie the 3-D obstacles—flaws in the negotiating setup itself.

3-D Negotiation: Playing the Whole Game

Common problems in this often-neglected third dimension include negotiating with the wrong parties or about the wrong set of issues, involving parties in the wrong sequence or at the wrong time, as well as incompatible or unattractive no-deal options. Acting entrepreneurially, away from the table, they ensure that the right parties are approached in the right order to deal with the right issues, by the right means, at the right time, under the right set of expectations, and facing the right no-deal options.

Former U. Many people mistake tactics for the underlying substance and the relentless efforts away from the table that are needed to set up the most promising possible situation once you face your counterpart. When you know what you need and you have put a broader strategy in place, then negotiating tactics will flow.

Chile had what appeared to be a very attractive walkaway option—or in negotiation lingo, a BATNA best alternative to negotiated agreement. By unilateral action, the Chilean government could radically change the financial terms of the deal or even expropriate the mine.

Imagine that Kennecott had adopted a 1-D strategy focusing primarily on interpersonal actions at the bargaining table. It would try to be culturally sensitive, and it might choose elegant restaurants in which to meet. Fortunately for Kennecott, its negotiators adopted a 3-D strategy and set up the impending talks most favorably.

The team took six steps and changed the playing field altogether. Second, to sweeten that offer, the company proposed using the proceeds from the sale of equity, along with money from an Export-Import Bank loan, to finance a large expansion of the mine. Third, it induced the Chilean government to guarantee this loan and make the guarantee subject to New York state law.

Fourth, Kennecott insured as much as possible of its assets under a U. And sixth, the collection rights to these contracts were sold to a consortium of European, U. These actions fundamentally changed the negotiations. Instead of facing the original negotiation with Kennecott alone, Chile now effectively faced a multiparty negotiation with players who would have future dealings with that country—not only in the mining sector but also in the financial, industrial, legal, and public sectors.

If an agreement were not reached and Chile acted to expropriate the operation, Kennecott would have a host of parties on its side. It is unlikely that 1-D tactical or interpersonal brilliance at the table—whether in the form of steely gazes, culturally sensitive remarks, or careful and considered listening to all parties—could have saved Kennecott from its fundamentally adverse bargaining position.

Claiming Value.

It drives you nuts, trying to juggle them all. But number one, it will change the perception on the other side of the table. And number two, it will change your self-perception. It will come across with a whole other level of conviction.

Negotiating For Dummies, 2nd Edition

While negotiators should generally try to improve their BATNAs, they should also be aware that some of the moves they make might inadvertently worsen their walkaway options. For instance, several years ago, we worked with a U. The company had already researched possible cultural barriers and ranked its three potential partners according to the competencies it found most desirable in those companies. After approaching the negotiations in a culturally sensitive spirit, and in what had seemed a very logical sequence, the U.

The team abandoned those talks and was now deep into the process with the second most desirable candidate—and again, things were going badly. Imagine subsequent negotiations with the third, barely acceptable, partner if the second set of talks had also foundered—in an industry where all would quickly know the results of earlier negotiations.

As each set of negotiations failed, the U. Fortunately, the U. This helped the U. The U. In short, doing so would have created the equivalent of a simultaneous four-party negotiation structured as one U. This more promising 3-D setup would have greatly enhanced whatever 1-D cultural insight and tactical ingenuity the U. Swiss banking executives saw no reason to be forthcoming with Bronfman; they believed they were on strong legal ground because the restitution issue had been settled years ago.

But after eight months of lobbying by Bronfman, the World Jewish Congress, and others, the negotiations were dramatically expanded—to the detriment of the Swiss. The bankers faced a de facto coalition of interests that credibly threatened the lucrative Swiss share of the public finance business in states such as California and New York.

They faced the divestiture by huge U. It was, however, an almost unimaginable outcome at the beginning of the small, initially private game in which the Swiss seemed to hold all the cards. Another way for negotiators to claim value is to shift the issues under discussion and the interests at stake.

Map Backward and Sequence

Consider how Microsoft won the browser war negotiations. The best negotiators are often quiet listeners who patiently let others have the floor while they make their case. They never interrupt. Encourage the other side to talk first.

That helps set up one of negotiations oldest maxims: Whoever mentions Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish numbers first, loses. While thats not always true, its generally better to sit tight and let the other side go first. Even if they dont mention numbers, it gives you a chance to ask what they are thinking. Another tenet of negotiating is "Go high, or go home. As long as you can argue Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish convincingly, dont be afraid to aim high. But no ultimatums, please.

Take-it-or-leave-it offers are usually out of place. You should expect to make concessions and plan what they might be. Of course, the other side is thinking the Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish same, so never take their first offer. Even if its better than youd hoped for, practice your best look of disappointment and politely decline. You never know what else you can get.

The glue that keeps deals from Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish unravelling is an unshakable commitment to deliver. You should offer this comfort level to others. Likewise, avoid deals where the other side does not demonstrate commitment. Dont Absorb Their Problems. In most negotiations, you will hear all of the other sides problems and reasons they cant give you what Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish you want.

They want their problems to become yours, but dont let them. Instead, deal with each as they come up and try to solve them. If their "budget" is too low, for example, maybe there are other places that money could come from.

Stick To Your Principles. As an individual and a business owner, you likely have a set of guiding principles Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish — values that you just wont compromise.

Scan Widely

If you find negotiations crossing those boundaries, it might be a deal you can live without. At the close of any meeting — even if no final deal is struck — recap the points covered and Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish any areas of agreement.

Make sure everyone confirms. Follow-up with appropriate letters or emails. Do not leave behind loose ends. Know Your Hot ButtonsExercise: Negotiation Styles 1. ExampleNegotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish Negotiating Behaviour Gavin Kennedy describes 3 types of behaviour that we can display and encounter when in a negotiating situation. Third-party Negotiations1.

Mediation Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish3. Adjudication Negotiation Tips;1 Do not underestimate your power. Gihan Aboueleish Negotiation Skills -3 It is a mistake to assume you know what the other party wants. Firstly understand what it is you want? What do you think your opponent wants? Do you know your stakeholders?

Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish5. Do you know who the decision maker is? Are you negotiating with them? If not what affect does that have? Are there concessions you can build into the negotiation? What standards are there in the market place?

Know your price points? Information Sharing1. Company activities and market position2. Opinion on entry points3. What elements are clearly off the table or not up for Negotiation Skills - Gihan Aboueleish discussion and why4.

Opponents attitude and commitment5. Stakeholders and importantly decision makers7.And number two, it will change your self-perception. For instance, several years ago, we worked with a U. As a result, the book is a good prerequisite for making the best use of the other books in this list. It also increased the pressure on the larger packaging companies: They would face more competition and might not be able offer the same kind of exclusive, customized packaging service to their customers.

Each dimension is crucial, but many negotiators and much of the negotiation literature fixate on only the first two. Accommodators are sensitive to the emotional states, body language, and verbal signals of the other parties.