A multinational corporation (MNC) is a huge corporation with a headquarters in one country and offices, industries, or plants in other nations throughout the world. As a result of its global reach, international organizations must keep up to date on changes in the demographics, geography, mentality, and behavioral characteristics of their target audience in each of its various locations. MNCs must conduct extensive market research to advertise their products and services and earn a profit effectively (Wang, 2018). For MNCs to be successful in negotiations, they need to know the negotiating styles of both parties.
Differing Negotiation Styles
A range of reasons contributes to the differences in strategic bargaining strategies among Spanish and French negotiators. As a starting point, it’s important to note that the French prefer to talk about current events while they’re having a conversation. Respect, solid logic, soundness of avoiding confrontation, polite conversation, and humorous and formal styles differ between French and Spanish (Richardson, 2017). Spanish talks, on the other hand, tend to focus on the speaker’s interests. French consultants may spend significant time gathering information and debating details before the consultation begins. On the other hand, even if they do not want to give you the knowledge, they don’t take it personally when you ask for it. You may, however, have to dig for some of the more personal details on your own to complete the puzzle. A few contacts on the French side would be really helpful. The French emphasize Cartesian logic, which urges them not to take anything for granted unless it has been proven.
Similarity
Negotiation Pace – be prepared for a slower pace of discussion. Negotiations and decision-making can take a long time, even if the French don’t spend much time preparing for them. MNCs submissions can be re-analyzed and re-processed over and over again. Be patient, regulate your emotions, and realize that delays are unavoidable. The polychronic working style is common in France, particularly in the south. They are utilized to carry out various tasks and goals at once. Rather than discussing events in a sequence of occurrence, they speak nonlinearly, hopping from one issue to the next.
The global economy and globalization have been important characteristics of the present political paradigm. The claims and criticisms of multinational businesses have thus far served as the foundation for political importance (MNCs). MNCs’ dynamic expansion and impact on the world and the lives of millions of people worldwide make them so essential. MNCs’ lack of expertise can lead to a dismissive attitude toward cultural differences. It is best to try to comprehend the value proposition process and establish a problem-solving discussion for any challenges caused by unfamiliar cultures.
What could MNCs do to improve their position when negotiating
MNCs should conduct research before negotiating with a stranger; it will help them gain respect for cultural differences and help them rise above ignorance in many situations. Moreover, MNCs should consider how external service provider reflects their values, attitudes, and behaviors. The influences of their respective cultures shape the company and its coworker. Cultural understanding can be helpful while having a conversation with someone. MNCs can alter their approach during the debate to achieve the greatest results if any of these unfavorable suggestions (Bartlett, 2018). Culture can develop rifts between you and your suppliers; in this case, MNCs should always be looking for solutions to bridge the cultural gap. Finding common ground with its service providers, such as interest or objective, is the first step in creating an effective bridge between you and them.
Richardson, G. (2017). Anglo-French negotiations on the Spanish Partition Treaties (1698-1700): A Re-evaluation. In ‘The Contending Kingdoms, 173-190. Web.
It is important to note that the process of negotiations is a delicate process, which requires knowledge of effective strategies and an understanding of the perspective of the other party. One of the oldest and fairly common methods of negotiation is centered around threats. However, it is not clear whether or not the use of threats is effective during the negotiation process since it has both advantages and drawbacks. The given analysis will primarily assess if threats are effective during the negotiation process. The findings indicate that threats can be effective, but only in a specific set of conditions and against a specific category of individuals.
Defining Threats in Negotiations
It should be noted that the term threat is a broad concept, which can be interpreted as a number of influences, forces, or actors. In the context of negotiation, a threat is a type of statement done by one side with an intent to communicate that some form of hostile action or negative outcome will be inflicted if the other side does or does not do something the former side desires (Morveli et al., 2020). In other words, threats are tightly intertwined with the concept of intimidation, fear, and warning, where one sides benefits, and the other side experiences a loss.
Inherent Effectiveness of Threats
Threats belong to a category of a persuasive force, where restrictive actions and statements are made to sway the decision-making or behavior of the other party in favor of the one imposing them. It is evident that threats can be effective as a method of negotiation since it was utilized throughout the history of humanity. However, there are two critical factors, which need to be put in place in order to make these measures effective.
Firstly, it is highly important for the proponent agent to have some form of credibility for the opposition party in order to make the threat valid and perceived as such (Espinoza et al., 2020). In other words, threats can be taken seriously if the proponent of these measures has no authority, power, or perceived credibility to enforce them. For example, a threat of a lawsuit is more threatening from a professional law firm or legal agency than from an average individual since the former cases have more perceived power and credibility as well as competence to follow up with the claims.
Secondly, the context and strength of the threat itself are critical to the overall effectiveness (Espinoza et al., 2016). In other words, a serious threat with more undesirable consequences is stronger than a mild one. For example, a threat from a person with a gun threatening to take someone’s life is stronger than of a person threatening to file a complaint. Therefore, the combination of the perceived credibility of a proponent and the strength of a threat determines the overall effectiveness.
Specificities of Opponents
In addition to the factors inherent to threats, the specificities of opponents also play a major role in determining the overall outcome. Evidence suggests that “when the threat is not activated, high FTS buyers pay more than low FTS buyers. Consistent with face theory and social role theory, this effect is moderated by gender, with the association being stronger for women buyers than for men buyers” (Miles et al., 2020, p. 2).
In other words, women tend to have higher levels of face threat sensitivity or FTS, which in turn makes them more susceptible to threats compared to males. For example, in the context of negotiations, a person’s threats can be more effective if used against people with high FTS rather than low FTS. Therefore, the typology and characteristics of an opponent can play a critical role in influencing the general effectiveness of threats in the negotiation process.
Sustainability of Threats
It should be noted that so far, threats’ effectiveness was assessed in an isolated scenario, which does not include their impact on its consistent and continuous use, which determines its sustainability. It is stated that active use of threats as a primary method of negotiations can not only lead to a major backlash from an opponent but also force other potential opponents to take on a position with tougher bargaining conditions (Schneider, 2019). In other words, threats are not effective in the long term, and they are not useful for building sustainable and mutually beneficial relationships, which could lead to a multitude of gains in the long run. Therefore, threats are only feasible and plausible as a one-time solution, where a proponent does not plan to engage with an opponent and related parties in the future.
Conclusion
In conclusion, threats are a form of negotiation measure, which can be effective under a specific set of conditions. Firstly, threats’ effectiveness is determined by their inherent strength and a proponent’s perceived credibility. Secondly, threats are more effective against categories of opponents, who have a higher degree of face threat sensitivity. Thirdly, threats are only feasible as an only one-time solution since they are unsustainable and can make future negotiations more difficult. Therefore, threats should only be used if a proponent does not plan to negotiate with an opponent and related parties in the future, has the credibility and power to do so, and uses them against high FTS individuals.
References
Espinoza, M. M., Possebom, A. T., & Tacla, C. A. (2016). Construction and strength calculation of threats. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 1, 403-410. Web.
Espinoza, M. M., Possebom, A. T., & Tacla, C. A. (2020). On the calculation of the strength of threats. Knowledge and Information Systems, 62, 1511–1538. Web.
Morveli, E. M., Nieves, J. C., & Tacla, C. A. (2020). Measuring the strength of threats, rewards, and appeals in persuasive negotiation dialogues. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 35, e36. Web.
Schneider, A. K. (2019). Negotiating from the bully pulpit: Teaching Trump, tactics, and turmoil. Negotiation Journal, 35(1), 215–218. Web.
Mediation is a structural way of solving disagreements that do not necessitate the intervention of the court system. Moreover, it is an organized, collaborative, and participatory mediating technique that a neutral third party uses to assist the groups involved in reaching a solution (Sac Attorneys, 2022). Mediation allows for innovative solutions and can enhance the union-management relationship. Therefore, using the arbitration method in exploring future settlement possibilities carries no risk. This essay explores the benefits and drawbacks of grievance negotiation by focusing on aspects such as mediation methods, financial implications, time consumption, the norm of fairness among participants, and evidential procedures.
Benefits of Grievance Mediation
There exist various benefits of using the grievance mediation procedure. Firstly, the process is quite affordable because the parties concerned do not need to file hefty cases. This contrast with the legal way where bringing a matter to trial is a costly affair. Secondly, the technique is relatively quick as there is no shortage of moderators willing to assist parties seeking to resolve a conflict (Lawshelf Educational Media, 2022). For instance, a fast internet search could yield hundreds of arbitrators and mediation sites. Thirdly, the process has no complex legal or evidential procedures that need following. While most individuals accept a fundamental norm of fairness, the stiffest penalty a participant could inflict for misbehavior is withdrawal from the debate and go to trial.
Fourthly, the method allows participants to modify and broaden the area of their argument. Preliminary briefs and practical restrictions constrain the topics that the parties could raise during a case. Moreover, as situations change, the subjects of mediation may alter. This increased adaptability enables mediators to become problem-solvers rather than antagonists. Fifthly, intermediation permits flexible choices and agreements, unlike courts where financial damages are the only redress available. Consequently, the parties may reach an agreement via reconciliation, thus, barring or restricting one party from engaging in an action that was not previously anticipated (Jordaan, 2022). Sixth, because both groups must voluntarily approve of any solution achieved through negotiation, promises under the resolution are more probable to be honored than court-imposed ones.
Disadvantages of Grievance Mediation
Aside from its numerous advantages, grievance mediation has several disadvantages. Firstly, a memorandum of understanding does not usually arise from arbitration. Individuals may waste their time and resources in mediation to realize that they still have to go to court for a resolution. In addition, if adjudication does not succeed, a considerable amount of a group’s information will have been exposed to the other side, which would make it less beneficial in a future trial. Secondly, the method lacks federal and state legal proceedings and provides no constitutional safeguards to participants (Lawshelf Educational Media, 2022). Thus, mediation among persons with different expertise, power, and varying amounts of available resources, may culminate in a grossly unequal outcome, as the less-well-positioned party feels frightened and handicapped.
Thirdly, no legal principle can be established during the intervention process. Numerous discriminatory lawsuits, for instance, are initiated to gain redress in regards to the complainant, which creates a new lawful guide with more significant societal ramifications. Hence, mediation is useless in these instances since arbitration is only ‘successful’ if a high court finds in favor of the underlying issue. Fourthly, in negotiation, usually, there exists no official discovery system. Hence, if either of the conflicting parties cannot resolve the problem, there is no means to compel the disclosure of evidence (Lawshelf Educational Media, 2022). Instead, the one demanding revelation should rely on the other person’s pure intentions, which may or may not be adequate.
Conclusion
In grievance mediation system, parties or individuals who construct their resolutions have more influence over the result of their disagreement because they have a fair say in the process. Nonetheless, due to unavailability of formal norms, the participants may fail to reach a deal and decide to go to court. However, arbitration encourages a problem-solving strategy that goes to the source of the problem in order to achieve a fair resolution for all parties.
References
Jordaan, B. (2022). Helping organizations and individuals develop conflict wisdom. Conflict Resolution Quarterly. Web.
Lawshelf Educational Media. (2022). Advantages and disadvantages of mediation. Lawshelf.com. Web.
Negotiations are found in almost any field of human activity. This false process involves several participants and stakeholders, each of which has its own requirements and desired results. A precious component of the negotiations is the statement of purpose, which will guide the decision-making process. This case study is a negotiation for the sale of a house and includes a description of the participants in the procedure, the object of sale, and an assessment and analysis of the necessary sources necessary for the preparation and conduct of negotiations.
First, it is necessary to consider the object and its characteristics, which will be the center of the proposed case study on negotiations. Thus, at the center of the proposed process will be the sale of an apartment building in Harbor City, CA. I am the representative of the owner of the house, who is offering $499 999 for this property. The house has three bedrooms and three bathrooms, and the total area is 1,890 sqft. The house was built in 1991 and had two garage spaces and 0.5 acres of land. A vital aspect of these negotiations for the sale of a house is that a potential buyer offers to purchase real estate at a reduced price. One of the reasons proposed by this party is the house’s date of construction and the possible complications associated with it.
The next step is to identify the parties involved in the negotiations. Hence, on the one hand, it is the owner of residential real estate, an agent hired by him, and a potential buyer and an agent representing his interests. The buyer is a young man of 40 years old who wants to buy a house for his family, consisting of him, his wife, and his daughter. A 55-year-old man who inherited the house is interested in the sale. The stakeholders involved in the sale-purchase procedure of the house include loan servicers involved in the sale, as well as any real estate agents involved in the transaction. Among them may be insurance agents, title companies, and home inspectors (Morris, 2022). The buyer is a young family who wants to buy their first house, and the seller is an elderly couple who wants to reduce the area. These stakeholders may not be directly involved in the negotiations but will have a stake in or influence the process. It is worth noting that it is crucial to consider the interests and motives of all parties involved to successfully conduct these negotiations.
When preparing for the sale of a house, one of the primary sources is information about the current state of the residential property sale market in Los Angeles. Thus, the real estate agent hired by the seller must carefully study the market conditions and comparable housing sales in the area. In this process, specialists such as home inspectors and home appraisers can be involved, who will provide a professional assessment of the condition of the house and its market value. Collecting this information will help determine the appropriate value of the seller’s property. Another vital source of information when selling a house is the study of the financial condition of the buyer. Thus, the seller must ensure that the buyer can afford the property at the requested price. In this case, this party to the negotiations requests a discount on the purchase, which requires me to develop a plan for negotiations on a payment schedule or other financing options.
The next aspect that needs to be considered when preparing for the sale of a house is the legal requirements and regulations related to the sale of real estate. For example, it is essential to make sure that the property being sold complies with the building codes established by the Basic Building Code and complies with the Model Building Codes. Moreover, from a documentary point of view, important sources of information are homeowners insurance records, showing any transformations and changes in real estate, as well as home repair and maintenance records (Waugh & Rogazc, 2022). Utility bills are also valuable, as they show the monthly expenses for the maintenance of the house. It is also vital for the buyer to provide information about any unforeseen circumstances that may arise after the purchase (“The essential guide: Documents you need to sell your house,” n.d.). They must be included in the contract of sale, and among them may be a housing inspection or unforeseen mortgage expenses.
The main purpose of these negotiations is the achievement of mutual consent and satisfaction of both parties in selling residential property. In other words, both parties and stakeholders should reach a mutually beneficial agreement without any disputes or disputes (Kim, 2022). The expected result of these negotiations is the successful sale of the house by the owner at a fair and appropriate price. For the buyer, the expected result is the real estate purchase at an acceptable price for him.
In conclusion, conducting negotiations is a complex process that requires careful preparation to obtain successful results for all parties involved. As a representative of the seller of residential property, these negotiations are important to me because an effective sale process will lead to a successful outcome for my client. When preparing and conducting the negotiation procedure, I will research market conditions, necessary legal aspects, and documents.
The ability to negotiate is directly linked with the abilities one needs to improve as a salesperson. Negotiating is not just concerning the money; it is also a useful skill in one’s interpersonal life. Lack of negotiation strategies will have a negative consequence on both one’s personal and professional life because they are life skills. Generally, negotiation strategies such as getting prepared, being firm while making offers and counteroffers and asking of questions are essential in organizations or even for individuals and should be implemented for success to be realized.
The first resource on negotiation encountered from the databases is “Three Steps to Making Smarter Counteroffers.” As per the article, during any negotiation, the opposite side will eventually make an offer. (“Three steps to making smarter counteroffers,” 2023). In essence, the initiative is now in the individual hands at that point. The person undertaking this must make a counteroffer unless they want to accept that offer or leave the table. The second resource is “Sales training tips to avoid price discounting.” According to the article, it is noted that discounts must be applied in businesses. However, sellers should be keen enough not to lose profits (Negotiation Experts, 2021). Therefore, it all depends on how a salesman deals with his customers to avoid price discounting and later loss of profit.
Getting prepared is one of the tips that is needed for negotiation. For example, in workplaces, getting prepared is essential when an individual intends to negotiate salary expectations. Generally, it makes the negotiation effective simply because individuals know what is required and the range at which they ought to range (Walden University, n.d). In preparation, identifying the best package for one self’s compensation is also an important aspect to consider. Essentially, this is because it acts as a counteroffer, and one should disclose their needs for a complete package.
Being firm is another essential tip in a negotiation. Individuals should choose a reasonable counteroffer based on the information they acquired during their study to avoid falling into this trap and hold onto it until the other side provides a compelling argument for them to change their position. Individuals should all try to be persuasive to enhance a reasonable negotiation (Shonk, 2022). By “persuasive,” generally, it means a justification for a different figure or package than they had produced based on new information or data. An employer might, for example, state that he is aware that some of his rivals are providing bigger compensation ranges. But because they are a lot bigger than they are, they require them to spend much more time working for a bigger clientele. Individuals provide pay that enables one to lead a respectable professional life and significantly influence smaller businesses.
The third tip or skill referred to in the source is asking as many questions as possible. In essence, this is a good strategy in negotiation since one can ask questions to determine the customer’s area of interest. Essentially, it helps determine many strategies that are to be implemented, like the timing of a deal and how the deal benefits the company. Therefore, by finding a solution to the asked questions, one can scale at a higher margin when the strategies are implemented well. Generally, this helps in determining what is needed in the firm and how beneficial it will be. Therefore, asking questions is beneficial for strategic negotiators.
In summary, organizations and individuals should use negotiation strategies such as being prepared, being firm and asking questions while making offers and counteroffers in order to succeed. They help run projects and also have a good scale bar of development in those deals. This article has just highlighted three skills that are vital in negotiation. That is, getting prepared, being firm, and lastly, buying the customer’s pain and, after a good evaluation, selling it. Therefore, for the success of any firm, negotiation strategies are elements to be implemented.
The basis of this analysis was the negotiations that were conducted with the writer and the book publication. The main task of this process was the sale of printed and electronic rights to distribute my book. Consequently, the prominent participants in the negotiations were the writer, me, and the representative of the book publication. The purpose of the meeting was to come to a general agreement that would satisfy both parties as much as possible. Initially, my goal was to receive half of the profits from the sale of my book, and the publisher set himself the task of acquiring 65% of all sales revenue. During the negotiations, the parties came to a mutual decision that I, as a writer, would receive 40% of the sales of my book, and the publisher would receive 60%, respectively. This consensus was adopted by calculating the price matrix and the zone of possible agreement (Macy, 2021). This analysis provided an opportunity to test all possible interest rates for each party and determine in which area they overlap with each other.
Another key aspect of the preparation process was the answer to the seven fundamental questions of the negotiations. This procedure made it possible to clearly understand such aspects as what is expected of the process, what decision is expected from the second participant, and the value that the future negotiation will create. In addition, these issues concern areas such as the criteria and characteristics of why the other party should work with me, alternatives that would be acceptable, possible commitments, and communication strategy for the negotiation. Along with this information, it was necessary to determine the best alternative to a negotiated agreement, where I was willing to accept a 45% profit. This amount was a threshold for accepting the agreement but not the desired one for the publisher. Thus, good preparation allowed for conducting the information-sharing phase productively. Both participants knew the conditions of all parties, expected conditions and outcomes, and the necessary analytical research on the publishing market was conducted. Emotional intelligence has played a role in controlling the climate of the negotiation process (Pérez-Yus et al., 2020). The next step is a more detailed examination of the process under study in order to isolate the most valuable insight.
Structural Components of the Negotiation Event
When conducting negotiations, the final stage or resolution is crucial. This stage implies an assessment and analysis of the negotiated outcome and the entire process that took place between the parties involved (What is the importance of negotiation? n.d.). Moreover, studying the final stage of negotiations provides an opportunity to gain awareness about one’s authentic self in the negotiation process, certain behaviors necessary in such cases, and the most valuable negotiation tools. Therefore, when conducting negotiations, it is necessary to consider each of their stages since each can provide insight to isolate essential lessons.
Structural components occupy a special place in the negotiation process. One of them is the venue for negotiations. The discussion of the future transaction regarding the sale of copyright to the book took place on neutral territory, in a specialized office space of the business center. This choice was due to the fact that holding negotiations directly in the publishing office could give the second participant an advantage. The representative of the publication could feel more comfortable and offer conditions to which I could not agree or would make concessions that would not satisfy my wishes regarding the outcome of the transaction.
The negotiations took about three to four hours, which is quite a small amount of time. During this time, each of the participants had the opportunity to speak about the desired results of the negotiations and possible areas of disagreement and consult with other parties regarding the final decision (What is the importance of negotiation? n.d.). It is worth noting that two people directly participated in the process, but they resorted to the help of third parties. This time has made quite an immense contribution to the development of negotiations since the pre-designated time frame contributed to a more precise and straight-to-the-point procedure for information exchange.
One of the aspects that I may have changed when negotiating in the future is the benefits-sharing strategy for each party. Thus, the negotiation would resort to using integrative negotiations when a common value through mutually beneficial trades is formed and the best agreement for both parties is reached (De Janasz et al., 2021). In other words, I would have invested more in the necessary market research and other similar negotiations, which included the sale of the rights to publish the book. This action would help me better understand what percentage I should expect from the publisher and not rely on my own ideas about how negotiations should end. Moreover, changing this aspect will also help to limit the possible conflict between other participants and me since everyone will take part in negotiations with sober and balanced expectations.
Analysis of the Negotiation Process
The negotiations began with the designation of the initial positions and wishes of the participants. On my part, as a copyright seller, the initial desire was to receive half of the profit from all sales. I felt confident because my work could have significant success in the market. This circumstance was also facilitated by conducting an analysis of the book market, which included studying the preferences of the audience and the popularity of books of the genre I chose. The initial position of the representative of the publishing house was to receive 65 percent of the profit, that is, to provide me with 35 percent. This was due to the need to pay for such costs as printing a book, salaries for employees, marketing, and payment for publication in online sources. It can be said that the second participant also had a reasonably confident position, as he had extensive experience in negotiations on the purchase and sale of copyrights.
The highlighted interests and the best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) played a significant role. Pinkley et al. (2019) stated that “negotiators with valuable BATNAs set more ambitious goals (higher aspirations and extreme bottom lines), and they make and receive more advantageous first offers than do their poor BATNA counterparts” (p. 35). Therefore, I carefully prepared myself before conducting the negotiation process. I was willing to accept a 45 percent profit, and if these terms were not satisfactory to the publisher, I would not make the deal. This decision was made at the expense of the fact that there were other publishers who might have agreed to a higher percentage. They could not provide other privileges and benefits that the selected publisher had. That is why the BATNA set by me contributed to the choice of the second party to the negotiations and the final solution of this procedure. For the publisher, the percentage I proposed was the threshold for accepting the agreement, but not the desired one due to the need to pay for the work of employees and the costs associated with the sale of the book.
The statement of interests also played an essential role in obtaining the final outcomes of negotiations. Correctly set guidelines contribute to a smoother process since each of the parties will adhere to the set results of the negotiations. I was interested in getting the most significant percentage of the profits, as the book could be a significant success. The same can be said about the publisher, who set himself the goal of getting the best percentage for himself. At the same time, a valuable aspect that minimized stress and conflict situations was that both sides of the negotiations were interested in a neutral decision-making process and were ready for some changes in the contract.
The leading element in the negotiations was the definition of cultural and communication elements. This aspect implied the definition of the nature of this process. Henceforth, it was the building of a relationship with the publisher that led to long-term cooperation. This element of the negotiation culture had a positive impact on communication, as it helped to avoid misunderstandings and conflicts that could contribute to the termination of interaction with the publisher.
During the negotiations, the only problem was determining the interest rate that would satisfy both the writer and the publisher. This was because the initial position of 50 percent was highly unprofitable for the publisher because it did not fit into BATNA. Because of this, there was a certain level of tension, as both sides were counting on a faster completion. This problem was addressed by developing the price matrix and determining the zone of a possible agreement. Both parties have carefully studied these aspects and weighed all possible alternatives to the distribution of interest from the sale. Thus, a mutual decision was made, which satisfied both the writer and the publisher.
These factors also had a positive impact on building the climate during the negotiations. The procedure was kept at a positive level in order to achieve the most satisfactory outcome. This also allowed for finding more creative solutions to the problem, conducting more effective communication and innovative negotiations (Pérez-Yus et al. 2020). Other aspects that contributed to the improvement of the climate were a good level of self-awareness and self-regulation of both participants in the negotiations. These qualities allowed controlling emotions that could interfere with negotiations and contributed to a more substantial exchange of information.
During the negotiations, various strategies and tactics were applied, which allowed for achieving a satisfactory result for each of the participants. An essential component of this process was the determination that the purpose of this procedure was to gain value, not gain (Gates, 2022). Therefore, both sides applied a communicative strategy that implied the mandatory sharing of information and immediate statements of possible dissatisfactions. It is worth noting that no countermeasures were evident, which could significantly affect the conduct of negotiations. Moreover, there was no need for these steps since the negotiations were smooth and positive.
These negotiations have become a good lesson for me, which I can effectively apply in the future. The aspect that I would change in future negotiations regarding the approach to problem-solving would be better prepared. In other words, I would instead explore various strategies and measures that can contribute to creating more value in the negotiation process. Thus, I learned that the preparation process should include not only the study of the market and the second side but also the various tactics and approaches used during the bargaining process.
Description of the Final Outcome of the Negotiation
The negotiations ended with the fact that I, as a writer, would receive 40 percent of the profit; therefore, the publisher would receive 60 percent. This agreement is in the zone of a possible agreement for both parties, which proves its effectiveness. Moreover, the price matrix showed that this percentage ratio between the publisher and the writer is also favorable for both. However, in order to gain a better understanding of why this particular decision became the final one, it is crucial to consider the other outcomes of the negotiations.
Initially, both sides provided elections that would satisfy their interests. For me, it was splitting the revenue from sales in half, and for the publisher, getting 65 percent was satisfactory. The final solution was to split the interest rate of 40 percent for me and 60 for the writer. It can be said that this was a win for both parties to the negotiations since these measures were in the zone of possible agreement (Halton, 2021). The definition of this aspect was facilitated by the study of the market and trends in sales of book products (Macy, 2021; McZell, 2023). Thus, both private negotiators came to a mutual decision and the creation of value in this process.
It is worth noting that during the bargaining procedure, other outcomes that could change each party’s assessment of the negotiated settlement were possible. Therefore, it was important for the publisher to receive a more significant percentage of the profit due to the financial costs associated with the publication of the book. Despite the fact that 60 percent satisfied this participant, it was possible to increase this percentage since 40 percent is quite a big bet for a writer. However, an understanding of the value and prospects for the potential success of the writer’s book contributed to an upbeat assessment of the proposed settlement.
Negotiation Case Study Learning Experience
I believe that I have conducted quite productive negotiations and can assess myself as an effective strategic negotiator. However, this does not mean that I do not have areas that can be improved. This is due to the fact that negotiations within the selected scenario are simple for implementation. For this reason, I need to develop the skills that may be required to conduct a larger-scale bargaining process involving a more significant number of participants and possible outcomes. For example, I want to learn how to hold power better when negotiating. This feature implies having control over resources in the bargaining process (Barry et al., 2019). Thus, it will be my responsibility to conduct extensive research in preparation for the following similar procedure in the future. This action will allow us to better understand at which stages of negotiations it is better to use the acquired skills.
The main changes after the negotiations were gaining more confidence and a sense of my authentic self. I learned to understand myself better and use the capabilities of emotional intelligence. This quality provides an opportunity to determine the emotional state of the opposite party (Pérez-Yus et al., 2020). In addition, it will contribute to greater self-awareness, with which it is possible to derive valuable lessons for future negotiations. The primary tool that I have gained is the ability to build a correct and consistent strategy for conducting negotiations. Hence, the most important of them was the definition of BATNA, price matrix, and zone of possible agreement (Barry et al., 2014). I realized that for me, the most effective is a communicative approach, which implies expressing all concerns about potential results or terms of the agreement.
Negotiation is a frequently used practice in the contexts of business and international affairs. To be a good negotiator does not only mean convincing a discussion partner and ensuring that own interests are met. On the contrary, it is the ability to come to an agreement acceptable to each party. Therefore, it is essential to know the peculiarities of different cultures to make negotiations mutually beneficial for all participants.
Differing Business Practices
Business and the regulation of international affairs can hardly be imagined without negotiation. Caputo et al. (2019) regard this process as opportunistic interaction between two and more parties having a conflict and seeking the best way of joint efforts for an appropriate solution. However, the need to negotiate some matters does not necessarily mean having a conflict. Regardless of the problem to be discussed, the negotiation begins with setting ground rules and exchanging information. Then, clarification follows to ensure that all parties are on the same wavelength in the negotiation process. After completing this phase, the parties can move to problem-solving and implementing the agreed course of action. Thus, the basic negotiation principles do not differ in domestic and international contexts.
However, the cultural background comes into play when a negotiator deals with foreign partners. For instance, Shan et al. (2019) claim that the representatives of individualistic Western cultures are prone to reach their own interests, compared to members of collectivistic cultures who strive to ensure positive outcomes for others. Given this, domestic negotiations can only help advance culturally-neutral communication skills, such as attentive listening, clarity of speech, and so further. To negotiate successfully with foreign parties, one needs to be culturally aware of the specifics of a partner’s origin and values.
Differing Communication Styles and Structure
As one can assume from the above, negotiating styles may vary depending on cultural background. Nevertheless, the findings of one study conducted with participants from 33 different cultures have shown that respect, openness, mutual values, and competence still play a crucial part in building trust between foreign negotiators (Brett & Mitchell, 2019). Despite such results, there is a variety of cultural factors that may still impact the flow and success of negotiations. Gender stereotypes represent a considerable part of the beliefs and attitudes in each culture. For instance, Western culture regards men as agentic and women as communal, while in Asian countries, this distinction is the opposite (Shan et al., 2019). This example suggests that seeing a gender of a negotiation partner may determine the expectations and attitudes of each party regarding the outcomes.
Best Practices for Easing Cultural Tension
Before identifying the best strategies to mitigate intercultural disagreements, it is necessary to understand that some conflicts may be impossible to eradicate. Thus, one should be able to distinguish whether conflict can be resolved, managed, or transformed (Odey & Ugar, 2023). Intercultural conflicts may emerge due to numerous reasons, and each case requires an individual approach. When a negotiator sees that a partner also strives to minimize tension regarding a specific matter, it is possible to resolve conflict immediately by actively listening and discussing possible mutually accepted options. If the conflict seems to be irrepressible, one opts for its management. The key point is to develop a system for the constructive overcoming of disagreements where all parties will have equal rights (Odey & Ugar, 2023). Finally, the conflict transformation strategy aims at establishing long-term relationships and gradual change of attitudes and perceptions of negotiating partners with the possible involvement of third parties.
Conclusion
At last, a negotiator must be culturally aware to conduct international negotiations effectively. Although the basic negotiation principles do not substantially differ across the globe, cultural peculiarities can affect the whole discussion process. Even the concept of gender as a part of human culture may determine the attitudes and outcomes of negotiations. Since intercultural conflicts may arise, one needs to identify whether it is possible to resolve, manage, or transform and develop an optimal strategy according to a specific case.
I worked for a marketing business, and I was responsible for meeting with a major retail chain that was one of my firm’s clients to discuss the goals and budget for an upcoming advertising campaign. The client, represented by the head of marketing and finance, desired to attract new customers and increase revenues at their physical locations. During this stage, essential themes were negotiated, such as the scope of the campaign, the overall budget, and the techniques that would be used to reach the target audience. The customer wanted to receive marketing materials through digital and traditional channels, such as social media ads and email newsletters. They did, however, have a limited budget and were attempting to keep expenses to a minimum. It was critical to maintaining the agency’s high output and client satisfaction standards. We needed to ensure we were adequately compensated for the work we would be doing, so that was something to keep in mind. I informed the customer that several suggested marketing methods would necessitate a larger budget and that the campaign could only be effectively executed with the necessary resources. Without adequate funding, I emphasized how difficult it would be to carry out the campaign properly.
After some deliberation, we agreed on a budget that satisfies both sides and a strategy that incorporates both digital and traditional marketing approaches. We were granted the go-ahead to proceed with the campaign once the client approved the completed work. The client and the agency profited from the fruitful discussions that resulted from this arrangement. The client received the agreed-upon scope of work, and the agency was adequately reimbursed.
In this case, success will be measured by our ability to find a way forward that meets both parties’ needs and improves their situation. Priority is given to connection building, trust formation, and bargaining from shared interest positions (Shell, 2006). My approach to negotiation in this scenario is either interest-based or principled. This approach prioritizes two-way dialogue, attentive listening, and compromise to reach a mutually beneficial outcome (Sigurðardóttir et al., 2019). In this case, my strategy would involve learning about and respecting the client’s preferences and constraints while protecting the agency’s interests. However, my approach may vary depending on the context. The consumer may have been using positional bargaining, an approach to negotiation in which one party tries to retain a fixed position or demand (Steinel & Harinck, 2020). In contrast, the other party tries to persuade them to change their mind. Their first goal was to find the most affordable rate for the campaign, but after some back-and-forth and an appreciation for the agency’s perspective, they were able to come to an agreement that worked for everyone involved.
Based on my counterpart’s communication, attitude, and behavior, I might have taken a somewhat different strategy had I been negotiating the same issue with someone else. I would still try to achieve a win-win solution, but my communication style and strategy would shift depending on the other party’s stance. One of the most important aspects of bargaining is learning to read the other side’s negotiating tactics and adapting your plan accordingly. Understanding one’s negotiation style and being able to identify and adapt to the styles of others are both necessary for improving one’s effectiveness and efficiency.
In conclusion, we employed a principled or interest-based approach to negotiation, which involves open dialogue and accommodating both sides to create a win-win agreement. The method may change based on factors such as the situation and the other side’s tactics, deeds, and attitudes. Therefore, understanding one’s negotiation style and being able to adapt to the styles of others are both crucial to achieving a win-win outcome in every negotiation.
References
Shell, G. R. (2006). Bargaining for advantage: Negotiation strategies for reasonable people (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Penguin.
Negotiations are part of our daily activities. In commerce, effective negotiations are the pillars of all successful businesses (Fowler 3). Companies who adopt effective negotiation strategies can be able to generate assessable business values for themselves and for their clients. Unlike in the past, negotiations have become very important to every business organization.
This has been brought about by deals becoming more complex, more professional buyers joining the marketplace, competitive behaviors in the market, and increase in internal negotiations within companies. Business experts classify negotiations into several types based on critical variables such as time, conflicts, and participants (Sparks 12).
In this regard, this case study seeks to analyze the Renault-Nissan alliance negotiations. Through this, this paper will bring into light the negotiation strategies that enabled these companies to reach a winning coalition despite the mutual challenges that faced the two companies.
Prior the year 1999, Renault and Nissan companies were faced with numerous fiscal challenges that threatened their future business successes. As such, Nissan was virtually insolvent in the year 1999. From the year 1990, the automobile company had progressively lost its money and market share.
By the year 1998, its automobile production had decreased by 600, 000 units. On the other hand, Renault was slowly regaining its production and market share after a devastating loss of $ 680 million in the year 1996. Equally, before the alliance Renault was still trying to come into terms with their much-publicized alliance with Volvo that failed to materialize.
In the year 1999, the two companies initiated approaches towards an alliance. Several meetings were later held to assess the prospects of their alliances. Notably, the media and the business experts have applauded Renault’s approaches during the negotiations for their unique negotiation strategies.
As such, the Renault negotiating team applied the six steps needed to reach the target and a winning coalition as described by Lax and Sebenius in their article A Guide To Complex Negotiations Published in the year 2012.
According to the Lax and Sebenius, a successful alliance can be achieved by identifying the right parties and grouping them into fronts, assessing inter-dependencies among fronts, determining whether and when to combine fronts, determining how much information to share and when, and being ready to learn and adapt to changing situations.
In the year 1998, Renault’s executive Schweitzer wrote to Nissan’s executive informing him of his strategic plan to form an alliance with Nissan. Schweitzer’s initiatives were against the bankers and investors’ wishes. After identifying the barriers that existed between their companies, Schweitzer was determined to convince all the parties involved of the importance of their alliance.
To carry out its initiatives, Renault had to get the approval from the government, their employees and the shareholders. The French government helped the company overcome most of its regulatory roles since they had power over board decisions. Equally, for successful negotiations Renault had to convince Nissan’s stakeholders, which included the Japanese government, labor unions, and investors.
These investors were Fuji Bank, Fuyo, and Industrial Bank of Japan. Renault was able to convince these parties with the help of Japanese government officials from the ministries of business, international trade, finance, and fair trade. By assessing the inter-dependencies among Nissans shareholders, Renault was able to determine how they affect one another (Lax & Sebenius 4).
Through this, they were able to negotiate with the Government and the relevant ministries to convince the Nissan Corporation to accept their decision in forming an alliance with them. In the end, the company was able to gain the backing of the company’s shareholders. The effectiveness of the above negotiations depended on the way Renault sequenced their campaigns.
Initially, Renault’s CEO sent a letter to Nissan’s CEO before meeting him. The letter was meant to inform the Nissan’s executive of his plans to form an alliance with the firm. Later on, Renault’s CEO arranged for a meeting with Nissan’s CEO. Soon after, though the French government the company was able to convince the Japanese Government in convincing the Japanese authorities.
During the negotiation process, Renault ability to learn and adapt to the situations enabled them to reach to an agreement with Nissan. Initially, Renault plan was to convince Nissan to buy part of their stock. In return, Renault was going to buy part of Nissan’s stock.
Nissan were unable to buy Renault’s stock, as they were bankrupt by then. As a result, Renault never dropped their plan to form an alliance with Nissan. They proceeded and bought part of Nissan’s stock. Through this, their ability to adapt was illustrated.
The two companies reached an agreement with the aim of enabling each company achieve its desired goals and overcome its fiscal challenges that were threatening the existence of the two companies. Renault had identified several benefits it were to gain from their union with Nissan. These benefits were meant to increase its global competitiveness, increase quality, increase sales, increase momentum as a revived firm, safeguard its market shares, internationalize the firm, and gain global reputation.
Through the initiatives, Schweitzer was determined to reduce the company’s R&D cycle from 36 months to 24 months. Similarly, unlike his predecessors Schweitzer wanted to shift the company’s focus from increasing the number of units produced and sold per year to increasing the quality of the cars produced and sold. Equally, before their alliance, Renault had no market share in the USA.
In the same way, the company’s reputation in Asia and Europe was progressively deteriorating. To achieve these initiatives, Schweitzer noted that Renault needed to improve their products’ designs and qualities (Harford 540). With these variables considered, the company had no option but to unite with a key automaker.
In the same period, Nissan was being faced with numerous fiscal challenges. Its sales were dropping drastically in the USA. As the drop in sales was being witnessed, the company’s debts increased with each passing year. To overcome these challenges and restore their financial glory, Nissan had to form an association with Renault.
Their association with Renault could enable Nissan to protect their identity, return their profitability, improve their worldwide competitiveness, ensure their future survival, preserve jobs, and develop efficient answers to debt-ridden Nissan Diesel. Similarly, the two companies reached an agreement out of their executives’ ambition to develop an alliance, which could enable the companies to uphold their operational freedom.
The basis of their alliances relied on their ability to form a joint equity venture that relied on their partners’ equities, capabilities, and willingness to cooperate (Donnelly & David 430). In the same way, the two companies were willing to come up with a common platform that could enable them create considerable economies in the development of their products.
In general, the association of the two companies could enable the two firms to cut their cost of production, gain from the economies of scale, and boosts their bargaining power. In case the two parties had failed to reach into an agreement it is eminent that they could have faced numerous challenges. For instance, there are higher chances that Nissan could have closed down their operation completely due to bankruptcy.
Before their alliance, their sales were dropping drastically both in Asia and the USA. Similarly, at home Nissan was facing numerous operational challenges owing their inability to repay their debts. Therefore, if it could have failed to reach an agreement with Renault it could have been forced to shut its operations.
If the company could have shut down its operation, more than 130 million people could have lost their jobs. Equally, the Japanese government could have lost huge revenue generated from the company. Alternatively, if Renault could have failed to reach a deal with Nissan it could not be enjoying the success and the market share they currently command in the international automobile market (Magee 123).
Before their joint ventures, Renault’s profits were increasing progressively following Schweitzer’s appointment to head the firm. This implies that without their association with Nissan the company could have continued to increase their profits. However, the company could not have been able to improve their products’ designs.
Equally, without the association the company could have been able to conquer the American Market, as before their alliance they had no sales in the USA. In the same year the Renault-Nissan alliance was initiated, Daimler-Chrysler alliance was ongoing. After the two automobile firms were merged in the year 1998, their manufacturers agreed to combine their efforts.
The alliance became the third largest automobile firm in the world. The rankings were based on their revenues and capitalization. In the same year, the joint firmed sold 4 million units and generated $155.3 billion. However, in the year, 2000 the joint firm’s revenues dropped drastically. It is estimated that in the same year the company recorded a loss of $500 million.
In the year 2001, the company losses increased forcing the company to cut more than 26000 jobs. During the year 2009, after Daimler exited from Daimler-Chrysler alliance Fiat merged with Chrysler to form Fiat-Chrysler alliance. In the alliance, Fiat owns 53.5 % of the company. Before their alliance, the two companies’ executives noted that their union would increase on their returns.
Fiat was to bring in more capital and technologies in the ailing company. These technologies would help the company to develop competitive and efficient cars. On the other hand, Chrysler have been designing and producing cars that have gained international appeal for the last few decades. With the two companies merging, several benefits were going to be realized.
Among these benefits are decrease in the cost of production, increase gains from the economies of scale, and boosts in their bargaining power (Giessner & Viki 78). It should be noted that the negotiations that led to the merger between Daimler and Chrysler failed while the merger between Chrysler and Fiat succeeded. In my opinion, the union between Daimler and Chrysler made business sense.
However, I believe that the differences between the two companies’ organizational culture and management should be blamed for the failure of the alliance to realize their goals. For instance, Daimler’s officials were accused of running Chrysler USA operations in the same manner they run their affairs in Europe. The company failed to realize that the operation methodologies in the USA were different from the operating methodologies in Europe (Brown & Nicole 45).
Worldwide, Chrysler is reputable for their innovative products, while Daimler is reputable for its focused decision-making. Due to the differences in their organizational culture, the alliance between the two companies was not destined to last (Hurn & Brian 32).
After more than 10 years, the alliance between Renault and Nissan is considered successful. In the aftermath of the alliance, Ghosn assumed the leadership of Nissan Corporation. Prior the end of 2000, Nissan profits had increased. Increased in the company’s profits were witnessed until the year 2008 when the world experienced global recession.
Between the years 1998 and 2008, the company managed to settle its all debt, which had before threatened their existence in the world market. Since the formation of the alliance, Nissan’s personal management has changed (Brown & Nicole 46). Currently, the company evaluates its workers based on their performance.
Through this, the company has been able to dismiss more than 14, 000 ineffective workers in the last decade. Through this initiative, he managed to cut the cost of operation by $9.48 billion in three years. From the above initiatives, the company has been able to reduce the number of its personnel while increasing its returns.
Equally, through the alliance the company managed to increase its sales by 78% by generating $92 million between the years 2004 and 2007. In general, through the alliance Nissan managed to meet its objectives. On the other hand, Renault’s revenues were inconsistent unlike Nissan’s revenues. For instance, the company experienced an increase in revenue up to the year 2000.
In the year 2000, its revenues dropped up to the year 2004. During the year 2004, its revenues increased. Equally, after the alliance the company’s production increased. The alliance between the two companies led to developments in Renault’s defective parts ratio. Similarly, Renault managed to improve their production through its Nissan productions.
During the year 2005, Schweitzer retired from Renault Corporation. Upon his retirement, Ghosn took over as the president of the two companies. After Ghosn took over the leadership of the two firms, he set out some ambitious goals for Renault. In the end 2009, it was realized that his goals had failed to materialize by a huge margin. By the year 2010, the company had made a loss of $ 4.5 million.
Based on the above analysis it is clear that Nissan benefitted greatly from the alliance. Generally, after the alliance Nissan with the help of Renault’s cash was able to settle its debts and increase its production. Though Renault recorded some improvements in its operation after associating with Nissan, it should be noted that its gains from the alliance are far less than what Nissan gained from the alliance (Deresky 43).
For instance, currently Nissan controls approximately 8% of the global automobile market, while Renault controls approximately 4% of the global automobile market.
Works Cited
Brown, Orice and Nicole, Clowers. Troubled Asset Relief Program the U.S. government role as shareholder in AIG, Citigroup, Chrysler, and General Motors and preliminary views on its investment management activities : testimony before the Subcommittee on Domestic Policy, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Accountability Office, 2009. Print.
Deresky, Helen. International Management: Managing Across Borders and Cultures : Text and Cases.. 7. ed. Boston, Mass.: Pearson, 2011. Print.
Donnelly, Tom, and David Morris. “Renault-Nissan: a marriage of necessity?.” European Business Review 17.5 (2005): 428-440. Print.
Fowler, Alan. Negotiation: skills and strategies. London: Institute of Personnel Management, 2010. Print.
Giessner, Steffen, and Tendayi Viki. “The Challenge of Merging: Merger Patterns, Premerger Status, and Merger Support.” Pers Soc Psychol Bull 32.3 (2006): 339 352. Print.
Hurn, Peter, and Brian J. “The influence of culture on international business negotiations.” Industrial and Commercial Training 39.7 (2007): 354-360. Print.
Lax, David, and James Sebenius. “Deal Making 2.0: A Guide to Complex Negotiations.” Harvard Business Review 1.2 (2012): 1-6. Print.
Magee, David. Turnaround: how Carlos Ghosn rescued Nissan. New York: HarperBusiness, 2003. Print.
Sparks, Donald B.. The dynamics of effective negotiation. 2nd ed. Houston: Gulf Pub. Co. , 2011. Print.
Negotiations strive to achieve a consensus among parties that have differing opinions. Ideological differences are common among individuals and whenever they take place, negotiations need to be instituted so that the differences receive required solutions. For negotiations to be effective, the parties to the conciliation need to utilize factors such as effective communication, accept change, be keen listeners, and avoid emotional flare-ups. Consequently, the cases provided by the paper are very practical in presenting the relevance of the factors that lead to successful negotiation. These cases clarify the reasons why parties need to ensure that successful negotiation should be a win-win situation.
Introduction
Negotiations characterize our daily activities. Decisions concerning education, work, and places of residence are outcomes of negotiations. Although individuals may not realize that a certain decision is arrived at after a process of negotiation, the decision may always require some level of negotiation. In advanced levels, people negotiate to get answers that solve various challenges that come their way. Conflicts that cut across borders or issues that arise between organizations compel concerned parties to engage in a process of negotiations in the quest to address the situation. While many people engage in negotiations, some do not understand the factors that facilitate successful negotiations. As such, the individuals enter into a negotiating session without prior preparation a phenomenon that at times leads to disappointing results. It is within this context that this essay explains the factors that are essential for a successful negotiation and uses two examples to highlight negotiations themes.
Essential Factors for Successful Negotiation
Effective Communication
Negotiation involves two or more parties who are focused on solving conflict and attaining an acceptable outcome that satisfies the interest of all negotiating parties. For successful negotiations, there is a need to engage in practices that utilize effective communication. It is paramount to assert that communication is vital in ensuring that the issues under examination receive the requisite redress. In the perspective of Lewicki, Barry, and Saunders (2016), communication is a process where a sender encodes and sends the message to a recipient who decodes it and provides feedback. Concisely feedbacks depend on the message and the scale of understanding. Poorly encoded messages are susceptible to unwanted responses. The response acquired after sending a message relies on the process of encoding and packaging the information. Smart negotiators understand that to receive good results, they need to practice exceptional encoding strategies, which relay the information to the other party in its right content and quality.
Staying from Emotional Flare-Ups and Negative Feelings
Emotional flare-ups and negative feelings disrupt negotiations and yield disappointing results. Flare-ups and negative feelings are indeed the challenges faced by negotiators each time they address a conflict. Poor listening skills and bias are among the factors that trigger negative feelings and emotions during the process of negotiation. It is important to explain that negotiations should lead to a win-win situation and no one should be a loser. In the advent that one of the parties feels downgraded or belittled, the likelihood of emotional flare-ups is high. Successful negotiators understand that bias and win-lose situations are not acceptable in an arbitration process. In effect, emotional flare-ups, feelings of embarrassment, and anger limit the effectiveness of negotiations. The ability to think critically and provide a rational statement is impaired by flare-ups and negative feelings. In the words of Zait (2016), negotiators need to exercise level-headedness all through the process of conflict resolution. Critical thinking and effective problem-solving skills transpire when negotiating parties stay away from emotions and negative feelings.
Attention
For a successful negotiation that yields satisfying results, there is a need for attention. Parties involved in a negotiation process need to listen keenly to each other so that they can make informed decisions. The absence of attention leads to the omission of important details that could help in solving the conflict in question. Moreover, if the parties to the conflict do not listen carefully, they may fail to address the conflict and instead focus on less important issues. Lewicki, Barry, and Saunders (2016) explain that parties to a conflict need to be attentive so that they understand the issues raised and provide solutions that address the issue comprehensively. The explanation is not only practical but also beneficial to the parties involved in the process of negotiation. Fundamentally, listening is critical in understanding the issues raised by the other party.
Smart negotiators usually take their time to understand the perspective held by the other party. After listening to the other party, it becomes easy to persuade or change their mindset and enjoy a rewarding negotiating session. The ease in persuading the party to the negotiation emanates from the comprehension acquired after carefully listening to the points raised. By being attentive, one is in a good position of pulling out details from parties in the negotiation and address issues amicably. Sharma, Bottom, and Elfenbein (2013) state that mediators can at times repeat statements to confirm that the issue raised by negotiating parties is correctly understood. Furthermore, gestures and facial expressions can help in unearthing the intentions of the negotiating individuals and are easily observed when the negotiators pay keen attention during the arbitration session. It is momentous to state that a combination of verbal and non-verbal expressions is one of the major factors that lead to productive negotiation.
Readiness for Change
A successful negotiation should practice the concept of give-and-take. As such, the parties that are negotiating need to be ready to accept a mutually viable outcome. Sticking to a singular point of view and refusing to accept any other proposal leads to poor results. Since negotiation is a win-win situation, the parties need to understand that for positive results, they should be ready to sacrifice some of their standpoints and arrive at a common ground. According to Stoshikj (2014) as well as De Pauw, Venter, and Neethling (2011), readiness to sacrifice is a good ingredient that facilities effective negotiation. Notably, when negotiators are willing to change and accept mutually beneficial results, the process becomes smooth and efficient. Selfishness and refusal to sacrifice limits the room for productive negotiation. Practically, the basis of a successful negotiation is a mutual agreement that takes place after negotiating parties attain a mutual consensus.
Negotiation Cases
The two cases selected are from the book ‘Essentials of Negotiation’ by Lewicki, Barry, and Saunders (2016) pages one and two respectively. The first case concerns two women Jocelyn and Janet, who live in one room, while the second case is the airline case that is on the verge of bankruptcy. While these cases are different, they display some similarities because they compel the concerned parties to enter into some kind of negotiation. In the first case, a conflict is looming between Janet and Jocelyn. The conflict emanates from the different lifestyles led by the two women. While Janet loves a quiet way of life, Jocelyn likes interactive and noisy lifestyle. To solve the issue, the two women who are parties to the conflict need to negotiate and arrive at a solution that best addresses their issue. Presently, Janet plans to initiate a process of negotiation so that her interests are not violated. It is important to explain that the themes of negotiation are applicable in this scenario since the process requires these themes for a successful mediation.
The second case, which concerns the airline company, is another practical example of negotiation. The conflict in the airline context transpired because of the challenge of bankruptcy that compels the company to look for alternative solutions. According to Lewicki, Barry, and Saunders (2016), one of the best solutions arrived at by the airline executives is to reduce the expenditure by cutting down pilot salaries. To address the issue amicably, there is a need to include the parties involved that comprise the pilot union and the airline executives. The themes that facilitate essential negotiation such as flexibility, avoiding negative feelings and effective communication play a pivotal role during the conciliation process. For successful negotiation that will yield a positive outcome, the pilot union, and the executives have to find a common ground that will not only save the company from bankruptcy but will also address the issue of pay cuts.
Conclusion
Negotiation is a very important concept, which determines decisions that people make as they undertake their daily initiatives. It is important to emphasize that the difference between unsuccessful and successful negotiation lies in the themes utilized in the mediation process. Parties that apply themes such as flexibility, attention, effective communication, and avoid emotional flare-ups are likely to achieve a rewarding outcome during the negotiation process. The ability to reach an informed decision transpires because the parties can think critically, provide rational statements, and apply problem-solving expertise during the session. The cases highlighted are very vital in understanding the practical and real-life challenges that need an application of themes that facilitate successful negotiation.
References
De Pauw, A., Venter, D., & Neethling, K. (2011). The effect of negotiator creativity on negotiation outcomes in a bilateral negotiation. Creativity research journal, 23(1), 42-50.
Lewicki, R., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. (2016). Essentials of negotiation. Dubuque: McGraw-Hill Education.
Sharma, S., Bottom, W., & Elfenbein, H. (2013). On the role of personality, cognitive ability, and emotional intelligence in predicting negotiation outcomes: A meta-analysis. Organizational psychology review, 3(4), 293-336.
Stoshikj, M. (2014). Integrative and distributive negotiations and negotiation behavior. Journal of service science research, 6(1), 29-69.
Zait, A. (2016). Conceptualization and operationalisation of specific variables in exploratory researches–an example for business negotiation. Scientific annals of economics and business, 63(1), 117-123.