Negotiation Strategy and Tactics Tutorial

The conversation seems to be framed in a win-lose orientation to conflict. Each person wants to be right, and to win at the expense of the other. How can Jan and Ken move their conflict discussion into a win-win orientation?

Gina Blair and Daniel Trent cooperate and collaborate to achieve a common objective throughout their negotiation. A cooperative negotiation style is demonstrated as they combine their points of view regarding their clients concerns with outcomes to effectively solve the issues raised. The main focus of the negotiation is to reach an agreement rather than a continuous dispute. Accordingly, the conflicting objectives were resolved by compromises and solutions but forward by both Gina and Daniel. The negotiation style used between Gina and Daniel is described as principled negotiation where both parties jointly attack the problems arising to achieve a compromise.

This paper presents my reflections on the Negotiations: Strategy and practice coursework in the MBA program at Said Business School, University of Oxford. My paper will present various reflections on different themes of negotiation simulation undertaken by me during the course. This course has allowed investigating and reflecting on key drivers of negotiation techniques for me. I have learned that transparency and coalition are the core tenet of negotiation for me. For the purpose of this reflective exercise, I will conduct a comparative analysis of the process, dynamics and outcomes based on the themes such as negotiation styles, bargaining zones, power, emotion, coalitions, value claiming vs value creation etc. for the below-mentioned simulations:

Throughout the lecture and my prior knowledge, I identified that the influence tactics are obviously relevant to negotiation and they can be utilized in a variety of ways in negotiation. Looking back the activity, it enabled me to have a better understanding of these important techniques and skills as certain tactics my opponents and I may use were examined at the negotiating table.

In this course, I have learned that it is possible to dramatically improve my ability to negotiate. I can improve my monetary returns and feel better about myself and the people with whom I deal. I also learned that there are several ways to test my intuition and approach. The course provided me with an opportunity to assess my “instinctive” bargaining style and provides suggestions for how to further develop my bargaining abilities. The negotiation exercises were a good way to cement several of the concepts from the book and lecture and gave me several opportunities to get to know my classmate more and test some new insights with them.

1) Identify two potential distributive negotiating gambits that Sharon Slade should consider to advance her agenda.

1. Jenny Folsom is the manager of a group of marketing specialists. She has good relationships with most of her team except Connie Perez. Jenny is on the verge of letting Connie go. Connie just cannot seem to live up to Jenny’s expectations. Over the past year, Jenny has talked to Connie several times, but Jenny has seen no improvement. Connie believes she is trying to do the things that Jenny asks.

It is a complex social process which already becomes part and parcel of our society.

Mastering negotiations is an art and talent that requires knowledge, patients, honesty, control, likeability, flexibility, et cetera. In the film Bridge of Spies James Donovan is a New York attorney who is appointed to a case that involves a soviet spy, he is not a government employee, however, those in the United States believe he should have allegiance to the United States. In this analysis, I am going to discuss the negotiations between James Donovan and Rudolph Abel. Rudolph Abel and James Donovan at a surface level may not have much in common and likely have different ideologies. However, this analysis will show that differences amongst others can still result in a win-win negotiation for all involved. Mr. Abel is on trial in the

Although the negotiation turns out to be a half failure, my insight on natural preferences for different types of influence tactics is improved. First of all, before engaging in a negotiation, you have to clearly know what the ultimate goal is for the negotiation and all those bargaining skills and tactics should centre on the objective of the negotiation. Second, knowing your negotiation partner well is extremely important and could play a significant role in reaching the goal. Comparing to my prior knowledge, knowing your partner of the negotiation is definitely a noticeable oversight. Thirdly, after all those preparation work, appropriate influence tactics should be selected to match the characteristics of the other party in the negotiation. For this point, I was much inspired when I saw the others doing the negotiation and they were good at analyzing the negotiation partners and taking advantage of their subordinates’ weakness. For example, one of my classmates used emotional appeal to force Pat Taylor to spontaneously obey and wear the safety glasses by saying that taking the risk of losing the ability to look and see his grandchildren is not wise action and this is because that Pet always talks about his grandchildren. To deal with

In Preparation: As we drew closer to the day of our final negotiation, I came to fully understand and appreciate that the problems we were tasked with addressing were inextricably snared in the toils of ideology. Over the weeks of rereading the course texts, and revisiting my lecture notes, I subtly arrived at the conclusion that in a negotiation aimed at resolving conflicts centered on profoundly intimate systems of

A ruthless, aggressive and cold blooded negotiation style is the framework approach most people have when it comes to negotiation,[6] a theoretical example of that is Adversarial Approach Style Negotiation.[6] But in reality, as mentioned by experts and researchers such as Fisher and Ury [3] it doesn’t have to be that way. As the world moves to more sophisticated platforms of communication, negotiation follows the trend and Problem-Solving Approach(citation) is in a way, the “antidote" of Adversarial Approach Style Negotiation. Getting to YES[3] suggest an Interest-Based Model for the use of Problem-Solving Approach. Interest-Based Model focus on separating the person (positional) from the problems (resolution) and then concentrate on the resolution. This way allowing for both parties in a distributive way to get the results they both want.

Getting to Yes was originally written in 1981 by Roger Fisher and William L. Ury. The book is subtitled "Negotiating agreement without giving in." The book is a handbook on the concept of principled negotiation, taking an American perspective on the issue of negotiation. The book has been highly successful, and widely read in the business community. Getting to Yes focuses on the authors' philosophies about negotiation, and putting those philosophies to practical usage.

Though the issue looked like personal conflicts on the face, it actually stems from the friction between two departments fundamentally different in their working methods and thought processes. The fact that the two managers, Ellen and Ronnie, with different working styles leading these two departments has only compounded the problem. Ellen’s complaint was that Ronnie’s team is not sending their timesheets in time, which is leading to late payments from the insurer and shortage in cash flow. Even Ronnie acknowledges this but the solution appears to be different in each other’s minds. Ronnie is adamant that they just need more time, while Ellen is saying that genuine effort is required, not just time extensions. As much as

5) How would you have done this negotiation differently? Please cite Negotiations best practices that you would