NEGOTIATION & DECISION MAKING MRC 4073 Semester I, 2014/15 ASSIGNMENT 1 Lecturer: TAN SRI DR. MOHD. ZULKIFLI By: NURUL AIN NABILA BINTI ZAINUDDIN MR131100 Submitted on: 3rd November 2014 Write an essay on effective Negotiation. Describe in your essay the philosophy and fundamentals of integrative negotiation and distributive negotiation. Include in your essay the discussion of the following terms and discuss how some of them influence the outcome of your negotiation: i. ZOPA [including aspiration, reserve point, surplus] ii. POSITION AND INTERESTS iii. ISSUES iv. Trade-off v. Time Pressure vi. Escalation of commitment vii. Winner’s curse viii. Social Dilemma ix. PRISONER’S DILEMMA x. Mythical Fixed Pie mind-set xi. Framing xii. BATNA You may use illustrations or case studies or examples that you know to explain some of the concepts or terms. Answer A negotiation exists between two or more parties and it normally done …show more content…
Distributive negotiation is appropriate in "divide the pie" situations, when there is a fixed amount of resources and this usually involves win-lose situation where one party will win and the other parties will loses. Distributive negotiation normally entails a single issue to be negotiated and involve only two parties. Meanwhile, according to Michael Watkins and Susan Rosegrant, in their article, Breakthrough International Negotiations, theystated that integrative negotiation is possible when the parties have some shared interests or opportunities to realize mutual gains through trades across multiple issues. Integrative negotiation involves two or more parties and it is a win-win situation.In simpler word, through cooperation, each player in integrative negotiation earns more than they would get, on average, than if the player fought each other. Table 1 below showsmajor differences between distributive and integrative
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.
“Instead of approaching the problem in a competitive as distributive bargaining (claiming value only for one), the integrative negotiation the parties adopt an attitude aimed at solving the problem and seek a favorable outcome for both” (Business Blog Review, 2011).
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.
Negotiation occurs on a regular basis in a daily life and individuals negotiate in business occasions or outside of the workplace. Having superior negotiation skills is conductive to the success in personal life and career development. This essay will indicate that my natural preferences for different influencing tactics, comparisons between theory and practice, and a personal action plan to improve negotiation skills based on the role-play activity in my class.
Analyze the article and critique the distributive negotiations style used by Matt Harrington. Discuss your opinion of his strategy and the outcome of his negotiations.
Prepare responses to the questions below after viewing the Negotiation Strategy and Tactics Tutorial in this week's lecture. In drafting your answers to the questions, make sure that you apply course concepts in your answers.
In this negotiation exercise, I was assigned as the Seaborne Governor’s negotiator as part of a six member party meeting to negotiate a deal with Harborco to build and operate a deepwater port off the coast of Seaborne. The Governor on the whole was very interested in seeing this deepwater port built in Seaborne as she believes that the size of the project would provide the stimulus for a dramatic recovery in the state.
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
It occurs in profit or non profit organizations, government sectors, dealing among nations and also in our personal situations such as salary package, house purchase, marriage, divorce and etc. The strategy to use can either be distributive or integrative depending on the situations and the outcomes that the party want out from the negotiation.
In the topic of this discussion, I think it was an integrative or interest-based bargaining and not a distributive bargaining.
By taking this course, we have learned the different types of negotiations and the strategies to be used in
Distributive bargaining is a very important negotiation skill. Used as the core of the core of an negotiation, distributive bargaining is defined as, “a negotiation method in which two parties strive to divide a fixed pool of resources, often money, each party trying to maximize its share of the distribution” (Michael R. Carrell, 2008). Within the distributive bargaining process, the two parties involved have to negotiate over a set of assets in which one person looses and the other gains. This is why Distributive bargaining is also called Zero-sum. Carroll explains that distributive bargaining is called a zero-sum process because one party looses whatever amount is gained by the other” (Michael R. Carrell, 2008).
1. Define Ethical Negotiation. Why do ethics matter? How would you apply ethics within the context of your Negotiation Final Project for this course?
1) Was this a Distributive or Integrative negotiation?- was it the optimum approach and why or why not.
Negotiation is all about a strategy. The end result is usually to end a problem that someone is having, whether it is personally or