The Negotiation Of Watkins's ( 2002 ) Framework

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:

Negotiation is a fundamental form of dispute resolution involving two or more parties (Michelle, M.2003). Negotiations can also take place in order to avoid any future disputes. It can be either an interpersonal or inter-group process. Negotiations can occur at international or corporate level and also at a personal level. Negotiations often involve give and take acknowledging that there is interdependence between the disputants to some extent to achieve the goal. This means that negotiations only arise when the goals cannot be achieved independently (Lewicki and Saunders et al., 1997). Interdependence means the both parties can influence the outcome for the other party and vice versa. The negotiations can be win-lose or win-win in nature.

“Successful negotiation is not about getting to ‘yes’; it’s about mastering ‘no’ and understanding the path to an agreement is” (Christopher Voss). During the negotiation process, there are a lot of moving parts and personalities. In addition, hurt feelings can all too often get in the way. The bottom line of any negotiation is to reach a settlement that will mutually benefit both parties. It’s a challenging situation by which compromise or agreement is reached while attempting to avoid arguments and disputes.

Being successful at negotiating requires one to consider the various styles: win-win, win-lose, lose-win, lose-lose, no deal and compromise negotiation. Each is unique in its outcome and business associates must consider their end goal of the negotiation and when each style of negotiation is

Consequently, negotiation is a process that can be approached in many ways. No matter what strategy we choose, success lies in how well we prepared. The key to negotiating a beneficial outcome is the negotiators’ ability to consider all the elements of the situation carefully and to identify and think through the options. At the same time, negotiators must be able to keep events in perspective and be as fair and honest as circumstance allows. Because a common ground or interest has brought the parties to the negotiating table, a negotiator can benefit by trying to capitalize on this common

Pre-negotiation preparation is essential for the optimal outcome of a negotiation, as it allows one to design a strategy and plan that can increase the probability of a beneficial agreement. Good preparation means thorough understanding of one’s own and the other party’s relevant information, including interests, constraints, and tradable resources. An effective negotiator should know one’s own best

In any negotiation, preparation is crucial; and having a set, outlined process to follow when preparing helps mitigate a potential oversight of any significant issues within the negotiation. Following a set process also helps one stay on task and in-line with what the important issues and factors are in a negotiation. In Bargaining for Advantage, G. Richard Shell provides a well-structured framework to follow in planning for a negotiation. For this reason, I used Shell’s negotiation preparation framework to plan for the negotiation between Rapid Printing Company (Rapid) and Scott Computers, Inc (Scott).

In chess you know the pieces but you can’t see into the other person’s mind. In negotiation you don’t necessarily know the ‘pieces’. You have to discover and develop your own pieces and find ways of uncovering your counterparts’.” The Essentials of Job Negotiations, (2011)

Whether it is at work, church or in our private relationships, negotiations are a necessary tool for reaching an agreement. They are made by discussing each parties point of view with the aim being to reach an agreement that is mutually beneficial. For the most part, negotiation is the process by which those people involved successfully adopt or abandon their respective position through the use of positional bargaining. There are different types of approaches for the negotiation process - some hard and others soft in their manner of approach. The desired outcome of

When entering into contract negotiations, the objective of each side is to obtain a contract of greatest benefit to their organization. This desirable outcome never happens by chance; it is always the result of careful planning. A critical part of this planning is understainding the role of power. This includes determining who possesses the power in bargaining, and establishing strrategies to bargain with individiuals who have more power than you. This power is needed to obtain the advantage in negotiating which will increase the liklihood of obtaining the goal (Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2011). Once in the heat of negotiation, it can be too late to try to catch-up on planning which failed to occur before the negotiation process began.

According to Halpert et al.’s Path model, negotiation consists of different phases such as preparation, differentiation, exploration, and exchange. The preparation phase in our previous negotiation became an essential part that played a role of evaluation of both parties positions in our successful outcome.

In today’s competitive scenario, achieving successful results through negotiations has become more important. But often negotiations face either complete failures or achieve far less than its actual potential. Also, such unsuccessful negotiations may perennially damage the reputation and relationships amongst the counterparties involved.

At this stage negotiators stop focusing on their opponent’s needs and priorities and state their own needs and priorities. It is about creating value for your side and asking for the value that you want in exchange. It is the most highly competitive stage of negotiation. Arguments often take place about the value of items on either side of the equation and whether sufficient value is being offered from the opposing side in exchange. It is important that these arguments are handled even handedly even when negative tactics such as threats are used to move one or the other side to action (Craver, 2004).

Negotiation is all about a strategy. The end result is usually to end a problem that someone is having, whether it is personally or