Category: Negotiation

Introduction

Almost every one bargains in his life at different stages. Negotiations have become very common and every one wants to buy high quality product at low cost. Experienced people know how to bargain, when to speak, when to ask for bargaining. Negotiations are the relationship between two parties working for their own benefits and needs. Almost every one of us negotiates at times. The word negotiations sound daunting. Anytime we are about to buy something we negotiate. Every one could not do negotiations effectively as there are some steps which make negotiation effective and successful. Traditional issues associated with negotiations are: how much you are going to pay for your desired product, what you would get for your export cherries. Negotiations involve number of people. Negotiation skills include number of things few of them are as follows: well prepared, patient, control on emotions, time pressure, focusing on a problem rather than a solution. Every one do negotiations but negotiation is hard at times.

Main body

Style makes your personality attractive and impressive. If a person wears big ticket clothes but he doesn’t poses any style he would not be able to attract anyone. According to Hara Estroff Marano there is an immense spread between style and fashion. Style expresses relationship to you and fashion lies in clothes. The eminence between both could not be more revealing. Style doesn’t require pricy clothes it requires creativity and courage. With the economy expansion United States ventured on a collective shopping fling. Style doesn’t directly relate to fashion, it belongs to one’s own intention and the way of putting individuals together. Person identity doesn’t rely on fashion; it’s highly based on style. Style is an individual typical way to make him prominent among others. It’s true that style is not a matter of life and death but style plays pivotal role in developing individuals’ personality. According to Anne Hollander clothes gives an ocular view aspect to awareness itself. Wardrobe is a person’s visual vocabulary and style is a classifiable conduct of speech. Self awareness and self knowledge has of great significance in developing one’s style.

A person could not develop a style until one has articulated himself. Style doesn’t require investment, money and pricy products. It requires security and relaxes feeling mentally and physically. Style makes individual personality distinct among others. It demands desire and confidence of expressing feelings and mood without any fear. Style is one part fashion and makes one personality attractive and appealing. Fashion adds life to one’s personality and style. It’s potential to have a good deal of clothes and not a troy ounce of style. Contrary it’s also possible to have few clothes and lots of style. Having few clothes and lots of style will add live to your personality and give you chances of conquering the world.

Fashion is a medium through which style is expressed but it takes less way to be stylish clothes. Problems involved in developing style follows: lack of confidence, lack of awareness, lack of expressing feelings, fear to be prominent etc. Style is essential for looking fashionable, pricy clothes could not give style to anyone. Style can be easily developed by gaining confidence and with the aid of awareness of person own speech conduct, body shape etc. One cannot develop style until and unless he knows his postures and gestures. Style doesn’t require any credit card. Fashion & style both have strong bond relationship but with few clothes a person can look attractive but pricy clothes could not give style to an individual.

Conclusion

It’s alluring to assume style is a new invention which doesn’t require any money or investment. Fashion and style both are indispensable to each other however, proportion could vary. Style doesn’t lies on clothes and pricy products. For developing style one must know his speech conduct, pattern and thoughts. Style reflects person’s personality and plays pivotal role in making him different from others. Confidence is the key element for developing one’s own style. Fashion and wardrobe gives visual presentation of a person but style reflects inner of a person. Style flourishes courage, confidence and creativity. At a glance, fashion and style both are important and makes one’s personality strong and impressive. Clothes, perfumes, makeup, hair styles heighten one’s style; a person can no longer afford to be without style in this fast moving world.

Tony is earning more than Joe because, during negotiations, he takes his time to get to know the customer’s carpet needs. He learns the customer’s taste by listening and observing closely the type of carpet the customer prefers. Before embarking on negotiations, Tony takes his time to learn the personal background of each customer and which factors they deem as the most important. For example, some customers might be more concerned about the size of the carpet, while others put more importance on the type.

Tony takes his time to interact with the customers in a friendly but businesslike manner. Tony does not put the price as the most critical factor during negotiations but finding a carpet that will suit the customer’s needs (Maddux, 1995).

After the customer has made a general statement on what they are looking for in the carpet, Tony makes an initial positive statement to build customers’ trust and earn his cooperation. He does this by listening keenly to the customer’s needs and finding the exact carpet that he deems suitable. By doing this, the customer feels appreciated and is at ease to discuss their desires with Tony. Tony understands that all negotiations are different since customers have varied individual carpet needs.

For example, some customers may put more emphasis on the type of carpet they want, whereas others are concerned about the kind and the price as well. Since Tony is a skilled negotiator, he studies such issues beforehand and formulates a plan of dealing with them before proceeding further (Maddux, 1995).

Tony sells the carpet at the retail price and never volunteers to give a customer any discount. He handles any conflicts and disagreements that arise during negotiations well since he explains the merits of the carpet to the customer and justifies the prices. This prepares the ground for the customer to reassess their stand and reach a compromise (Maddux, 1995).

Joe is the exact opposite since he never takes sufficient time to discuss the merits of the carpet with the customer but puts more emphasis on price. He has poor negotiation skills since he rarely takes customer need s into consideration when making a sale. Putting more focus on merit rather than customer needs destroys any chances of building a mutual relationship with the buyer, which is the basis of any negotiation process. Joe does not handle any disagreement from the customer well since he quickly reduces the price if a buyer hesitates, instead of trying to win over the customer through negotiations.

Price

Price is not the only focus of negotiation because other product characters must be taken into consideration. The quality of the product, the cost of production, and the profit margin must also be considered. Sometimes, negotiators who are eager to make a sale assume that they will lose most of the customers if they do not give price discounts. However, they forget that customers might start losing confidence in the quality of the product if a negotiator is always willing to lower the price (Mehta, 2009). Secondly, a negotiator is still entitled to reasonable compensation for the product or service they are selling.

Sticking to the retail price as a negotiator builds the customer confidence in the product or service that you are selling. A negotiator should always strive to defend the cost of the product by explaining to the customer the qualities and value of the product. A negotiator can also focus on the market price of the service or product to justify why their prices are reasonable (Mehta, 2009).

Higher Prices

Price is a significant determinant in business and often a significant focus during negotiations. However, if you want to win customers at a higher price, always focus more on the value of the product or service by emphasizing more on its benefits (Gebenlian, 2011). This demonstrates to the customer the benefits they are likely to reap if they purchase the product. Focus more on the additional features of the service of the product or services as this will justify the higher prices and persuade the customers to make the sale.

References

Gebenlian, G. (2011). Five ways to win on price. Web.

Maddux, R. B. (1995). Successful negotiation: effective “win-win” strategies and tactics. Boston, MA: Course Technology Crisp.

Mehta, S. (2009). One hundred twelve ways to succeed in any negotiation or mediation: secrets from a professional mediator. Bloomington, Indiana: Authorhouse.

The process of negotiation implies the implementation of complex procedures-discussions between individuals that have different objectives, especially in politics and business, during which they aim to reach an agreement. In exploring the principles of negotiation, Fisher and Ury suggest that negotiators are people first, which means that the human aspect of the process can be either helpful or disastrous. For instance, when reaching an agreement, parties can become angry at each other, get frustrated, sad, or offended. In bargaining, reaching a consensus, or developing an alternative solution, it is necessary to address the substance of the problem and focus implicitly on procedures that directly deal with them. In solving these issues, it is also imperative to separate them from relationships, which is one of the important recommendations in Getting to Yes.

The authors recommend effective listening as an integral component of negotiations due to the need to understand correctly what each side of the discussion is trying to say. I agree with the recommendation of listening to each other’s points as a fundamental part of effective negotiation for promoting understanding. Also, I agree that when communicating, parties of conflicts must focus not on their positions but rather on interests because specific stances allow them to focus on the problem and facilitate the shaping of compatible interests. Asking oneself questions such as “why?” and “why not?” regarding the identification of interests is recommended as a strategy for shaping one’s side of the narrative. These questions will subsequently lead to further considerations of constructing a person’s side of the argument through such questions as “whose decisions do I want to influence?” and “will I gain or lose support?” “what are the long- and short-term consequences?” and others. I agree with these statements because of the importance of talking about interests within negotiations and the need for parties to work on their reputations and look forward when it comes to seeking an agreement. Inventing options to reach mutual gain for all parties involved in the negotiation is essential. I also agree with the idea that realistic options are necessary within the process of negotiation because they consider the benefits for all parties involved.

The material exploring the recommendations for successful negotiations is useful because it states how one can alter perceptions and behaviors to reach the desired objectives within the process of negotiation. I deeply valued the advice to accept any emotions that come during the negotiation and consider these feelings as inevitable. Making feelings explicit is expected to make negotiations less reactive and more proactive, which is an essential outcome. When the participants of a discussion are free from unexpressed and suppressed emotions, they will be more likely to work on the issue rather than on their personal feelings. I have found such advice unexpected and interesting because the majority of negotiation manuals and ‘how-to’ web pages talk about negotiations as emotion-less procedures, especially between parties that pursue opposing objectives.

It was interesting to read about negotiations as a two-way process that implies collaboration between individuals. In my view, negotiations have always been targeted at achieving a goal that will be most beneficial to one party; however, the authors emphasized the need to find a mutual solution and evaluate arising issues from multiple perspectives. I found value in the breakdown of recommendations for such processes as brainstorming when inventing possible solutions and decisions necessary to implement within the negotiating process. For example, the message “in a brainstorming session, people need not feat looking foolish since wild ideas are explicitly encouraged” is very inspiring. It allows room for error and shows that negotiations allow mistakes and make it possible for people to learn from them.

When applying the recommendations of Getting to Yes to real life, school-associated negotiations come to mind. For example, school leaders are expected to negotiate good learning conditions with school management, ranging from lunches to baseball team uniforms. When preparing for the negotiation, school leaders can implement a brainstorming session together with other students to think about solutions to problems and communicate their desires of the negotiations’ outcomes. During meetings with school managers, leaders should clearly state their interests and seek mutual perspectives together with their ‘opponents.’ It is evident that both sides of the negotiation have similar goals in mind. For instance, increasing students’ knowledge and their learning outcomes during education. Negotiators should look into each other’s goals and interests and find matching points to develop solutions and reach a consensus.

References:

Ignatieff, G., Fisher, R., & Urey, W. (1982). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in Roger Fisher and William Urey. International Journal, 37(4), 649. Web.

ZOPA is the range at which both negotiating parties make a deal since they find the terms acceptable. However, finding this zone is a tedious process and requires some detective work. The seller of a product or service proposes and expects to fetch the highest maximum amount possible. However, the seller will also set the lowest amount they expect from the buyer which is referred to as the reservation price. On the other hand, the buyer wants to pay the least price possible but is still willing to pay a maximum amount which is referred to as the walk away or reserve price. ZOPA is when an overlap is reached between the seller and buyer price ranges.

As a seller, the most important aspect of ZOPA is to find out the seller’s walkway price without revealing your own. According to Harvard Business School Press (2005), after the seller has quoted the first initial offer which is higher than the reservation offer, they should let the buyer commit by allowing him to make the first offer. This first offer gives the seller information about the buyer before the negotiations kick-off. After that, the seller can ask the buyer what they think about the offer and listen carefully to the concerns that are raised.

The seller should be assertive when challenging any opposition from the buyer, but remember to remain respectful of the buyer’s interests while protecting their own. Ask the buyer probing questions regarding the price and listen carefully to the answers. After making an offer, observe a moment of silence that may be of 10 or 20 seconds to give the buyer time to think about it. Never accept the first offer from a buyer since they might think that it was too easy. All the above strategies will enable a seller to get information on the amount a buyer is willing to part with for the product or service.

References

Harvard Business School Press.,(2005). The essentials of negotiation. Watertown, MA: Harvard Business Press.

The type of negotiator

I am a principled negotiator who is focused on seeking integrative solutions to conflicts. I am not committed to certain positions in conflict and this enables me to give fair and impartial views regarding amicable solutions.

My general philosophy

My philosophy of negotiation is the separation of people from the problem. Thus, I perceive problems as independent issues that could be solved to help parties to resolve their differences. This helps in reaching solutions based on standards that are not influenced by personal views (Amgoud & Vesic, 2012).

A natural negotiator

I exhibit a high degree of a natural negotiator and I analyze issues based on wisdom rather than morality. Thus, I just not fulfill my duty of being a negotiator, but I ensure that I enable parties to reach long-term solutions. As a natural negotiator, I reserve my resources to be used where they could produce better results.

I like to negotiate

I like to negotiate a lot. Negotiation gives me a chance to explore issues in detail in order to understand their origin and factors that could make them affect parties negatively. Also, if I conflict with my friends and/or colleagues, then I try as much as I could to resolve the issue because I know that it could adversely affect my relationships with my friends and/or colleagues.

Relevant issues

It is important for negotiators to address relevant issues in conflicts so that amicable solutions could be found. First, it is important to address the main problem in conflict so that could understand why parties are conflicting. Second, it is essential for negotiators to consider the other contributing factors that could not be the main cause of conflict. Third, it is important to address the issue of personal motives so that a negotiator could comprehend the expected outcomes of all parties (Amgoud & Vesic, 2012).

Standards and justifications

Negotiators should comprehend the standards and/or justifications for using contention and conflict during negotiation. An understanding of the two components is important in arriving at excellent negotiation results. Conflict occurs in a negotiation when parties are encouraged to view the same end result using different paths. The advantage of the approach in negotiation is that parties could be helped to find their own solutions using different routes. The main disadvantage of the negotiation strategy is that it could be difficult to make parties think about different pathways of arriving at a common goal. On the other hand, contention in negotiation could be used to make parties think about personal intentions in a manner that no communication is expressed. The merit of the approach is that it could enable parties to re-evaluate their personal motives. However, the approach could result in violence during the negotiation process (Asmuß & Oshima, 2012).

Whether or not to include conflict and contention within a negotiation

It is important for a negotiator to analyze, investigate, evaluate, and make decisions in a rational manner as to whether or not to include contention and conflict in a negotiation process. A negotiator should analyze and investigate the issue presented by parties in an impartial way. Afterward, an evaluation should be conducted based on the findings of investigations (Coutinho, Cretan & Jardim‐Goncalves, 2012). Finally, the evaluations should be used to decide whether or not to include contention and conflict during a negotiation process. If the results of the investigation imply that the issue presented by parties is personal, then contention should be used. However, if the results of the investigation show that parties could have a common goal when they use different pathways, then conflict should be used in a negotiation process.

References

Amgoud, L., & Vesic, S. (2012). A formal analysis of the role of argumentation in negotiation dialogues. Journal of Logic and Computation, 22(5), 957-978.

Asmuß, B., & Oshima, S. (2012). Negotiation of entitlement in proposal sequences. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 67-86.

Coutinho, C., Cretan, A., & Jardim‐Goncalves, R. (2012). Sustainable interoperability framework for supporting negotiation processes. Enterprise Interoperability: I-ESA’12 Proceedings, 365-372.

Real-World Negotiation

As the task is to plan a negotiation in an interesting setting, the idea is to select a library as a setting. The rationale for this choice is having an experience of bad cooperation, but failing to react to it properly. During one of my previous courses, I had to become a part of a team for completing a project. However, all of the team members turned out ineffective. So, I was forced to complete the task by myself because the mark was collective. As a result, I had to stay up two nights and do work for three people, who did not want to conduct research and write the paper. Therefore, this negotiation planning is an attempt to describe what I should have done to avoid extra work that was unnecessary and know how to react to similar situations in the future. This one is not a spontaneous negotiation because teamwork is a common aspect of learning.

The idea of this planning is to be prepared for negotiating with team members so that everyone is responsible for their part of work and no one procrastinates during completing the project. The motivation is to reach an initial agreement that we will meet in the library on a timely basis (once a week) and work together on the paper, reporting on the progress and checking it so that nobody is forced to complete others’ parts to meet the requirements of the task. My interest is that I am responsible for my part only and all work is completed in time. The best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) is that we meet at least once in two weeks (online or phone conference is an acceptable option) so that everyone is confident that other team members are conducting research and developing their parts of the project.

In this case, those involved may demonstrate no interest in such a plan and have an aggressive stance because they do not want to spend time on library meetings. Therefore, the idea is to deploy a technique known as negotiation jujitsu. It means that I will not criticize or reject others’ opinions. Instead, I will look behind them and analyze their positions by asking enough questions to understand them so that it is possible to reach my BATNA (Fisher & Ury, 2011). The main feature of the method is to ask questions for understanding their positions. That being said, my negotiation plan includes the following steps:

1. Organize an initial meeting in the library, divide roles, and determine responsibilities;
2. Inform everyone on the criticality of timely meetings in the library with a special focus on benefits, such as being confident in the quality of the completed paper and avoiding the risks of being forced to complete others’ work;
3. Listen to their opinions and make sure that they support me;
4. Offer meetings once in two weeks if the rest of the team members reject my initial idea of meeting once in a week;
5. Introduce the option of online (Skype) or telephone conferences once a week (or two weeks based on their reaction) if they still reject my opinion as well as exchanging files for sharing the progress.

In the case of conducting this negotiation, class materials can be integrated for concluding whether negotiation was jujitsu and all possible techniques were deployed to reach BATNA. As for myself, during planning the negotiation, I have learned that there is nothing wrong with sharing my opinion and protecting it, especially when working in a team with everyone being equally responsible for completing their parts of work.

Reference

Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (2011). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in (3rd ed.). London, England: Penguin Books.

Introduction

Negotiation as an integral part of a business process requires special attention and skills. The success of a business is frequently dependent on the ability of negotiators to resolve the arising conflicts efficiently and achieve the best possible outcome. The negotiation which will be analyzed in this paper was witnessed in a medium-size company operating in the sphere of design while experiencing a period of decline.

Main Objectives

First of all, it is necessary to provide some background information concerning the negotiation considered in this paper. The negotiation occurred in the period of the company’s crisis as the number of clients’ orders had reduced considerably. At that time, the company was facing restructuring, and significant layoffs were expected. The negotiation was held between the management of the company and the representatives of the employees.

Initially, the interests of the parties appeared conflicting as the company’s goal was to cut costs without affecting the quality and the continuity of the working process. The employees, on the other hand, were interested in their job security. Evidently, the restructuring was of a high utility to the company but low to the staff. Thus, the success of the negotiation seemed to depend on whether value could be created.

Considering the type of this negotiation, it was an integrative one as the efforts were made to take into account the interests of both parties. While the employees were aware of the company’s struggling situation and the inevitability of layoffs, the management did their best to consider the staff’s interests. The common goal became to reach a wise decision in those complicated circumstances.

Both parties had to work on their positions to achieve the best possible solution in the conditions of conflicting interests. Finally, the position taken by the company’s management was to carry out the layoffs on a reduced scale and to offer some of the remaining staff different internal positions. The employees bargained for a higher compensation package in case of a layoff and retraining courses, funded by the company. It seems that the employees saw restructuring as an opportunity to change their employment position and guarantee themselves more security during the period of unemployment. Thus, value was created, and mutually beneficial outcomes were sought in the negotiating process.

During the negotiation, the positions were discussed, and some adjustments were made. As a result, the company provided the laid-off employees with the compensation package on better conditions. The severance payment was increased by 7% instead of 10% demanded by the employees originally. Retraining courses were funded by the company for the employees who were offered transitions within the firm. Although the company had to meet additional expenses in the form of increased severance payments and retraining courses funding, the company managed to cut costs at the necessary level to remain in business. At the same time, the employees’ interests were secured as much as it was possible in those conditions. It is clear that efficient conflict resolution ensured these balanced outcomes.

Conclusion

To conclude, the negotiation witnessed in this company, although representing a potentially high-conflict issue, was integrative since both parties made efforts to find a better outcome. As a result, despite the complexity of the problem, some win-win opportunities were found, and balanced solutions were achieved. It can be demonstrated that integrative negotiation is possible through compromising and perspective-taking even when the interests of both parties seem incompatible.

Introduction

To begin with, it should be stated that negotiations is the integral part of any cooperation. The fact is that, the concept of negotiations presupposes particular behavior of the opponents, independently on their attitude towards each other, thus, there are specific rules and principles of behavior. The phases of negotiations, which are originally defined, presuppose the particular principles, which should be incorporated. The aim of this paper is to discuss and analyze the phases of negotiations, give an example of actions, which should be taken, and discuss the pros and cons of each type of frame, used for the negotiation process.

Phases

Originally, all the negotiations are divided into three main phases: preparation, negotiations and analysis. Taking into consideration the negotiations on the matters of Chevrolet and Volvo Alliance, it should be stated that the preparation phase is the fundamental, as only properly prepared negotiations may be properly arranged, held and terminated. This phase presupposes the collection of the necessary information, studying the opponent and the subject of the negotiations. Moreover, in order to arrange smooth negotiations, there is strong necessity to study the negotiation style of the opponent (in order to know all the tips and tricks, which may be used) and elaborate several alternatives of the negotiation course, if the key course will reach the dead end. (Ury, 2001)

The next phase is the negotiations as is. It is divided into several steps:

• Setting the tone. Participants should clearly define and state their positions and aims, which they pursue. This step also presupposes the explaining of the possible benefits for the opponents.
• The next step is the exploring of the needs, which form the basis of the positions and interests, explained in the previous step. The opposite party does the same, and the conflicting points are defined. Nevertheless, if such points appear, there is strong necessity to develop creative alternatives without losing the win-win focus. Then, the tactics may be neutralized if necessary.
• After the interests have been defined, the parties represent their starting positions in the refining step. The first sketches of the agreement are made.
• The final step is the reviewing the results of the negotiations. Parties make the final amendments, and formalize the reached consent.

The final phase is the phase of reviewing the course and the results of the negotiations. Both parties analyze their mistakes and achievements, and define whether the negotiations were successful.

If all the described actions are undertaken timely, the success of the negotiations is inevitable. Originally, there is strong necessity to pay sufficient attention towards the preparation phase, thus, the possession of the necessary information on the opponent, his or her interests and price, which may be paid for these interests, will define the success of the negotiation flow. (Shell, 2006)

Frames

As for the matters of the frames, these may be explained on the example of the negotiations of the Soviet Union and the USA during the Caribbean Missile Crisis. Originally, in spite of the fact that the negotiations ended successfully for both parties, the essential frame of ideological visions restricted the course. The parties did not wish to let the opponent succeed, nevertheless, both parties did not wish to compromise more than the opponent. The frame of mutual mistrust essentially restricted the negotiation process, and, probably the results of the negotiations. Another frame, that may be stated is the extreme aggravation of contradictions, and the fact, that the world was on the edge of a nuclear war: both parties were afraid to make a mistake in the negotiations, and provoke the missile strike.

The fact is that, all the restricting frames tend to create obstacles for the successful and beneficial negotiations, nevertheless, the latter one helped the parties to avoid the further aggravation of the situation, and they managed to reach the mutual consent, sacrificing their own political interests for the sake of the peace.

Cognitive Biases

The cognitive bias of framing, which featured the negotiations on the merging of Samsung and Whirlpool companies prevented them from merging their managerial and industrial powers. Framing, which presupposed the attitude of Whirlpool managers towards Samsung as the second-sort manufacturer did not allow the negotiations end successfully. Samsung delegates, in their turn, did not wish to deal with the representatives of Whirlpool who even did not aim to conceal their prejudice towards Korean colleagues. (Shell, 2006)

Overconfidence, is the cognitive bias, which means the overestimating of one’s own opportunities, or the interest of the opponent to deal with the company. Sonar Inc representatives were too self confident during the negotiations with NASA representatives, nevertheless, they did not know that NASA has several alternatives, thus, the negotiations were failed. (Ury, 2001)

Self Serving Biases may be different. Originally, self-confidence explained in the previous paragraph may be harmful, nevertheless, if negotiators feel self confident, and negotiate with respect to the opposing party, the success of the negotiations is inevitable. The brightest example is coffee supplier for Mcdonald’s.

Reference

Lewicki, R., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. (2007). Essentials of negotiation (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.

Lewicki, R, Barry, B., & Saunders, D. (2007). Negotiation: Readings, exercises and cases (5th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.

Shell, R. (2006) “Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People” Penguin Publishing

Ury, W., L. (2001) “Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In” Penguin Publishing

Actions, which may be taken to improve the effectiveness of communications during the negotiation

The ability to improve communication effectiveness is one of the main factors, which adds to the whole outcome of the negotiation in general. The negotiations in most cases are based on the competition as two parties want to reach the desired aims and to get the much profit from the negotiation as possible. The effectiveness of the negotiations is the guarantee of the successful outcome of the negotiations and there are several ways how to reach the desired aim. The strategic actions, which may be provided to create effective negotiations, are the following: learning the strategic skillset, turning vision into action, and leveraging staff and technology to reinforce the vision. To be specific, the strategic actions are going to be discussed closer. Learning the strategic skillset is the very ability to communicate. The person should be literate and be aware of not only the theme, which is discussed. Leadership abilities do play not the last role in effective communication achievement. Turning vision into action is the strategy, which is reached by the person’s ability to apply on the negotiator the needs which are necessary, to make the person understands that what you want is exactly what is necessary for the negotiator, and this necessity should be done. Leveraging staff and technology is the other strategy, which is rather effective to provide successful communication. The scope of work, which should be completed before and during negotiations, is big ad to cope with it the wise manager will leverage the staff to the negotiation process and implement the technological possibility to make the negotiation communication successful (Bowery, 2005, p.151).

Two sources of power that would be appropriate to move the negotiation to resolution

There are some sources of power that are able to move the negotiation to resolution. The two sources of power, which were chosen for discussion, are personal power and information power. The personal source of power is the power that “drives from a variety of personal attributes that magnify other sources of power, including self-assurance, the ability to articulate one’s thoughts and understand one’s situation, one’s determination and endurance” (Macfarlane, 2003, p.470). The negotiations are impossible without the possibility of any party of the negotiations to possess this personal power. Being the core factor for the aim achievement, the personal power in the negotiations depends on the personal inner qualities and abilities. Being strong and powerful personality, the negotiations will conclude with the desired outcome for those, who have more personal power. The ability to convince, to give supportive arguments, and just to provide the relevant information from the desired side is the ability of the powerful people. The information power is the other source of power, which helps to provide the argumentative facts about the affair, which is discussed. The absurdity of modern society is that living in the world of information, people know little. All the information is useless and to get the really worthy facts is a power, which may be easily applied in the negotiation process, when the useful facts, which are unknown to others, may convince the person to take up the desired position. The only condition is that information should be trusted, relevant, and necessary for the other party in the negotiations (Macfarlane, 2003, p.470).

Ethical guidelines during companies’ negotiations (Sprint Nextel and Clearwire)

Being the Sprint Nextel member, the negotiations should be provided with Clearwire. The companies are working together for a long time as Sprint Nextel has a 50% share in Clearwire. Being the partners, the negotiations should be provided on friendly terms, following all the ethical codes of behavior. First of all, the main principle of business ethics is never to lie. The lie is the main issue, which makes the partner companies alien to each other. Clear and transparent relations are the main strategies to reach mutual understanding in negotiations. The traditional view of the negotiation is that one party should win and the other should lose. The concentration on the tactics will never end successfully. According to ethical principles, the parties of the negotiations should try to reach the compromise and to achieve the goal both (Harman, 2006, p.577). The desire to keep friendly relations in the future is the other ethical factor, which should be supported by the ethical codes of all parties. Respecting and supporting Clearwire in all its desires and intentions, Sprint Nextel may also count on the same relation from Clearwire’s side. Being sincere in the company’s intentions is the other factor, which should be counted in the companies’ negotiations. Moreover, providing some limitations for the Clearwire or making it feel uncomfortable in some position, Sprint Nextel should expect the same relation to them. In addition, betrayal is one of the main facts, which must never be present in the negotiation policies of both countries. Providing the negotiations on the discussed ethical principles, the companies should be sure of the strong support in the business.

References

Bowery, C. R. (2005). Lee & Grant: profiles in leadership from the battlefields of Virginia. AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn, New York.

Harman, L. B. (2006). Ethical challenges in the management of health information. Jones & Bartlett Publishers, New York.

Macfarlane, J. (2003). Dispute resolution: readings and case studies. Emond Montgomery Publication, Montgomery.

Cultural background

The United Kingdom has a history full of events, people there are very fond of their traditions, customs and rules, they like everything in order. The country started as a huge colonial Empire that owned a bigger part of the world, these days the UK is a Constitutional Monarchy. The country is economically stable and is a very attractive potential business partner.

The British are known for their politeness. This is a very important part of British communication and culture. Try to avoid asking questions directly, straightforward questions will find cold responses and will lead the conversation to become more distant. Avoid aggressive dialogue; this will weaken your bargaining position (Katz, 2008, p. 4).

The British are proud of their subtle and witty sense of humor. Besides, they may use humor as a tool, making a conversation indirect, which is typical for the British style of communication.

The style of business negotiations

Small talk and icebreakers should not be neglected in a dialogue with the British. A simple talk about British weather or a complaint about traffic and public transportation will help you develop a better contact (Slideshare, 2012, para. 2).

The famous “stiff upper lip” term means that the British do not like to show their emotions, no matter if they are negative or positive (Lebourg 2014, para. 2). In the UK, just like in the US, strong eye contact shows honesty and determination.

Gift-giving is not going to be taken well; it creates unwanted pressure (Kwinessential 2013).

The conversation should be spoken in a calm tone. Avoid raising your voice for whatever reason, being loud is considered impolite and ill-bred. Always remember about good manners, they are extremely important to the British, they have an impression that Americans are too casual. Keep distance, avoid touching, the exception is a handshake, in Britain handshake is an official form of greeting for both men and women. Make sure you are not interfering with another person’s intimate space (Lebourg, 2014, para. 5).

Try not to talk too much; the British do not appreciate too long lectures or meaningless conversations, or vague messages and descriptions. Listening more and speaking less is a feature that will characterize you positively to the British partners.

British society appreciates success and competition. They respect hard work, ambitions and achievements, but they will not accept showing off or acting arrogant because of your achievements.

Making business with the British you must remember that they like to have everything planned, but their planning is not detailed, main thing is to have a clear final goal (The Hofstede Centre, n.d., para. 10).

The famous British punctuality must not be taken lightly. There should never be a delay in a meeting with the British. Being longer than ten minutes late will be considered rude and irresponsible. Rushing is also unacceptable. Once the rules are established and the time is set, they will expect you to follow them and be punctual, they will not be happy about any changes (Kowol & Szumiel, n.d., p. 4).

It is better to establish the date of your future meeting with the British company representatives beforehand. The best is if you contact them and schedule the meeting a week in advance.

One of the most appreciated ways to work with the British is offering them your offers and terms in written form, you may open your dialogue this way – this will be effective and may help make your process of bargaining shorter, the British do not like long negotiations.

Though, the length of the process of negotiations will vary depending on the type of the company. For traditional British organizations, thoroughness is important, they will take time collecting information and rushing them will definitely lead to negative results. Younger companies will be moving fast, sometimes unexpectedly fast (Katz, 2008, p. 3).

If you are using presentations, be ready to share copies of your material. The key messages of your work and your offers must be clear and attractive. Also make sure you are well-prepared to answer questions, always be polite and stay calm even if the situation starts looking more casual.

The British respect a team of negotiators, but the team should not be a crowd, sending too many members to a negotiation meeting will lead to suspicions.

After the meeting and dressing style

A very important part of business meetings with the British is what happens after the meeting is over. Never reject an invitation to a pub, joining your new business partner for a beer is extremely appreciated in the United Kingdom. It is a binding part of the business meeting and refusing to participate in it may seem suspicious or offensive to your partner. You also must not bring up work topics at the after-business part.

Finally, remember about the “dress code”. You must never attend a business meeting with British people wearing too casual clothes. Wearing jeans also is unacceptable. Your clothes should be stylish, but at the same time conservative and classic. It is preferable to wear darker colors and formal suits.

Reference List

Katz, L. (2008). Negotiating International Business – United Kingdom. Web.

Kowol, A. & Szumiel, E. (n. d.) United Kingdom: Communication, Negotiations and Cultural Background. Web.

Kwintessential: Cross-Cultural Negotiations. (2013). Web.

Lebourg, J. (2014). International Business Negotiation – UK Social Behaviors and Business Practices. Web.

Slideshare: International Business Negotiations. (2012). Web.

The Hofstede Centre. (n. d.). Web.