Category: Negotiation

Introduction

This paper seeks to discuss the multi-party negotiations concerning the case of Rock and Roll Negotiator. In this case, the contracts of Bobby Singer and The Constituencies with Rock and Roll Label expire this year. To gain strength, the two clients need to have agents, and Agentville and Agentopoly have been contracted. In any multi-party negotiation, the negotiators will go through three relevant stages before making a contract. The first section of this paper will discuss the three steps of multi-party negotiation: pre-negotiation, formal negotiation, and agreement stage. The following section will explore the different strategies applicable in multi-party negotiation with a major focus on the win-win strategy. Finally, the paper will establish the role of coalitions in multi-party negotiations.

Pre-Negotiation, Formal Negotiation, and Agreement Stage

The first stage for any multi-party negotiation is the pre-negotiation stage, which comprises of two levels- assessment and preparation. Assessment involves establishing whether the conditions are ripe for negotiations. Under the assessment stage, the person in charge seeks to know whether to proceed with the negotiations or not. If the conditions are conducive for the negotiations, then the assessment stage will be responsible for laying the groundwork for deciding how to proceed with the collaborative process. Here, the role of the negotiator is to ensure that the party does not feel uncompetitive for the process. In regards to the above case, the agents must portray their clients- Singer and Constituencies very competitive for a new contract. In this case, the early stages of the negotiation process should have terms that will see Singers money increase by 15%. The agents will have the duty of asking questions regarding their clients interests and alternatives, providing background information on the matter, and finally gauging the potential for the agreement. On the other hand, preparation involves the acquisition of necessary knowledge, skills, and resources to allow the relevant party to negotiate on an equal footing with each other. Preparation is an essential step in the pre-negotiation stage, as each participant needs to equip himself with relevant information before deciding to enter the negotiation process (Lewicki, Barry & Saunders, 2010).

Formal Negotiation comes after the pre-negotiation stage, and it will involve the broader principles of negotiation. These will comprise matters that will be responsible for the beginning of the negotiation process and the appropriate style or method of negotiation. The formal part of the negotiation will also involve the creation of the rules and guidelines of the participants. At this stage, R n R will negotiate the terms of the two artists and the agents will look out for the R n R reactions to these terms. In the event of a coalition, there will be similar terms and conditions in the formal agreement, which will cover the common interests of all individuals. Finally, we have the agreement stage of multiparty negotiation that will see the sealing of the deal. The agreement stage calls for the creation of drafts for the agreed terms and conditions and then handing it out to the clients. Once the clients approve the contents of the draft, the deal will be sealed, and the concerned parties will have a contract. In the event, the clients are not contented with the terms and conditions then it will call for a new negotiation process because R n R in this case stands to lose their most profitable clients- Singer and Constituencies (Lewicki, Barry & Saunders, 2010).

Strategies Used to Manage Negotiations

Negotiation strategy calls for a strategy that will see both Singer and The Constituencies achieve their goals and sign new contracts with R n R. The first useful strategy is building the negotiation strategy that brings together all the clients- Singer and Constituencies to fight for one goal. The focus of this strategy is to win, and it will involve planning and implementing. This strategy also has bottom lines and targets which if not met then will call off the whole negotiation process. The win-win strategy evaluates the negotiation outcome and in the event, it does not seem achievable, then there will be no deal. Advanced negotiation strategy seeks to find a mutual ground for the two parties that will see that they both gain from the contract. The agents will seek to unify the needs of their clients to have a common goal. This strategy equally employs planning and implementation steps that will be through a negotiation team- the agents. In this case, for the contract to be lucrative there will be incentives offered by the relevant parties while at the same time managing agents ethics. A replication with principals and agents will lead to a successful deal and hence the signing of the contract. On the other hand, we have a cross-cultural negotiations strategy. Cultures affect negotiation contexts and the negotiators interests and strategies. In this strategy, proper communication and confrontation of inter cultures will ensure the clients needs are met, and the contracts become efficient. In most cases, a win-win strategy is applicable in most contracts because this leads to both or more parties benefitting their clients. More so, a win-win strategy helps the parties to stick together to meet the clients needs and demands (Guasco & Robinson, 2007).

Role of Coalitions in Negotiations

Coalition refers to the coming together of individuals and groups intending to attain a similar goal in the contract. The above case of Bobby and The Constituencies saw the coming together of their Agents to increase their negotiating power. Coalitions are responsible for increasing the power of the negotiators, and the coming together of participants in multi-party negotiations increases pressure on the other party- R n R Label. This pressure in turn leads to better deals from the negotiation process such as the two artists getting their money increases. When several parties come together in any negotiation process, then coalitions will ensure that there is adherence to the terms and conditions that will be beneficial to the parties. Another important role of coalitions in negotiations is to increase their power. When two or more groups or individuals come together in pursuit of a given goal, then they will have more power to make negotiations for the contracts. Coalitions bring people together with different individual differences that also increase the bargaining power in the negotiation process.

Negotiation is a social encounter that makes use of cognition, perception, and emotion. For this reason, coalitions will help increase the perceptions and cognition of the individual participants. Negotiators approach different negotiation processes with different perceptions and, therefore, when two or more individuals or groups come together, then their perception will be high. On the other hand, coalitions help minimize emotions in negotiations. Dealing with similar situations with others, several people helps individuals to have little or no emotions that come with the negotiation process.

Conclusion

Following the above stages of negotiation will ensure that Singer and Constituencies sign new contracts with R n R Label. Multi-party negotiation is a demanding process that requires several inputs from the participants. For an effective and successful process, multi-party negotiations will have to go through the three stages of pre-negotiation, formal negotiations, and agreement. In addition, the win-win strategy is effective in reaching a beneficial agreement between the negotiators. The aspect of coalitions can also play a significant role in achieving the agreements in multi-party negotiations.

References

1. Guasco, M. P., & Robinson, P. R. (2007). Principles of negotiation: strategies, tactics, techniques to reach agreements. Irvine: Entrepreneur Press.
2. Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2010). Negotiation (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
3. Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Negotiations play a decisive role in the life of any person living in a society as long as the interaction between people involves communicative means. Moreover, the trends of globalization that impact economy, politics, trade, business, labor, and many more spheres particularly affect negotiations or bargaining to achieve agreement between parties. The choice of strategies and appropriate techniques commonly depends on the time, power, and information and the context and participants of the bargaining process (Carrell & Heavrin, 2013). Therefore, this paper aims to explore negotiation strategies and techniques to assert that the variety of negotiation approaches allows for meeting different bargaining goals depending on agents interests.

Importance of Negotiations and Strategy Choice

The bargaining process has proven to be an omnipresent attribute of the everyday life of both the private and professional lives of people. The achievement of agreement over household decisions commonly involves similar communicational tactics as labor-related issues (Fisher et al., 1991). The relevance of negotiations to the sphere of labor and management is validated by the continuous emergence of problems and questions related to the quality of workplace conditions, wages, workers safety, development, and other pivotal issues. Qualitative and goal-oriented interactions between employees and employers are inherent in adequate well-structured negotiation of fundamental problems that play a decisive role in the prolonged cooperation of the parties on mutually beneficial terms (Huang et al., 2017). Thus, the ability to engage in the bargaining process on terms that allow for presenting ones requirements and interests constitutes the essence of a democratic workplace setting.

Although the interaction between employers and employees is commonly regulated by labor law, the processes related to negotiation are not strictly defined since parties might select any strategy or tactics they consider relevant in a particular situation. At the same time, National Labor Relations Act requires that the parties bargain in good faith, which is why the agents of the negotiation process must meet at a bargain table (Carrell & Heavrin, 2013, p. 172). Moreover, this regulation provides that neither party has to agree to any particular proposal as long as it continues to bargain in good faith (Carrell & Heavrin, 2013, p. 172). In such a manner, the negotiation process is defined and imposed by boundaries and general principles; however, there are several strategic options for parties to consider depending on their goals, interests, and resources.

The choice of a negotiation strategy depends on the timing, information, and power as essential elements; it is also predetermined by the context in which the negotiations are undertaken. According to Carrell and Heavrin (2013), information, time, and power are essential elements of negotiations. Firstly, the information factor shapes individuals assessment of reality, their negotiation strategy, and their expectations of what can be achieved, and thus the outcome of a negotiation (Carrell & Heavrin, 2013, p. 168). Since the exchange of information is the core of bargaining, its quantity and quality defines the type of strategy used by the parties. Commonly, the integration of information into the bargaining process involves the evaluation of BATNA (Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement) and ZOPA (Zone of Possible Agreement) (Sebenius, 2017; Yao et al., 2020). Secondly, the time factor involves deadlines and timing frames for both sides, within which decisions should be made, which triggers the choice of a certain strategy. Thirdly, power distribution sets the leverage opportunities for the bargaining sides; it predetermines whose interest might be dominating within BATNA (Sebenius, 2017). Thus, these elements determine whether distributive or integrative negotiation strategy applies.

Negotiation Strategies

Indeed, among negotiation strategies addressed by negotiation theory, distributive and integrative approaches are the two dominating ones. Both types require the parties to follow ethical rules in negotiations, namely ethics of purpose, ethics of principle, and ethics of consequence (Carrell & Heavrin, 2013). Abiding by the ethical principles, the sides devote to bargaining in good faith, and mutually beneficial outcomes are possible to be achieved. As Fisher et al. (1991) state, this principle might be called a win-win strategy through getting to yes. In other words, regardless of strategy and techniques pertaining to that strategy, the outcome pursued by skilled negotiators should be based on mutual gains.

Distributive Negotiations: Strategy and Techniques

The first negotiation strategy is referred to as distributive negotiation and deals with the bargaining over a single issue. According to Carrell and Heavrin (2013), distributive bargaining is a negotiation method in which two parties strive to divide a fixed pool of resources, such as money, each trying to maximize its share of the distribution (p. 173). It is often called a fixed-sum or zero-sum process since the participants share a finite quantity or amount of resource where the other party loses the amount gained by one party (Carrell & Heavrin, 2013, p. 173). Since it might be challenging to achieve a win-win situation under the procedures of distributive negotiations, the parties use specific techniques and tactics to pursue their goals (Schaerer et al., 2020). Five essential elements of distributive negotiations are commonly apparent in the zero-sum bargaining process.

Firstly, the identification of a target point is essential at the beginning of the negotiation when a negotiator defines the terms on which he or she would be ready to end the bargaining. Secondly, a resistance point or a bottom line is a maximum or minimum beyond which the negotiator will not accept a proposal (Carrell & Heavrin, 2013, p. 174). Thirdly, an initial offer is a starting point of negotiation when a party makes an offer. Fourthly, a settlement range or ZOPA identification allows for showing the acceptable range within which an offer might be accepted (Yao et al., 2020). As for techniques, an anchoring technique might be applied at this point to fix an initial offer and ZOPA. Finally, to achieve the settlement point, parties might apply the technique of bracketing, which is the process of moving toward a middle point between the opening offers (or brackets), which is the logical bargaining process (Carrell & Heavrin, 2013, p. 177). Thus, upon eliminating the alternatives outside both parties ZOPA, an agreement might be achieved.

Integrative Negotiations: Strategy and Techniques

An integrative negotiation strategy embodies a different principle due to the involvement of multiple and more complex issues; therefore, different techniques apply. According to Carrell and Heavrin (2013), integrative negotiation strategy involves making concessions to reach an agreement, but in addition, it involves searching for mutually profitable options and logical trade-offs (p. 186). However, since this strategy applies to cases when the issues under negotiation are not fixed, as in distributive bargaining, more creative, win-win solutions might be achieved. This approach is characterized by significant complexity since it is challenging for negotiators to make required trade-offs to attain optimum results due to restricted information processing capacity and capability, cognitive biases, and social-emotional difficulties (Park, 2019, p. 2). Therefore, specific techniques are required to identify both parties desired outcomes.

The process of integrating negotiators interests into the final agreement depends on the accuracy of the articulation of their goals. The most effective techniques applicable to this strategy are addressed by Fisher et al. (1991) with their four principles of getting to a win-win agreement. Firstly, the authors propose parties unveil their sincere interests instead of claiming their positions. In such a manner, more options for creative solutions might be identified. Secondly, by separating people from issues, negotiators will be able to eliminate the emotional and interpersonal relationship element and concentrate solely on the matters at the center of negotiation (Fisher et al., 1991). Thirdly, a technique of inventing options for mutual gain is based on the previous aspects and allows for achieving win-win agreement even in the most challenging situations. Finally, insisting on using objective criteria will allow for effective managing of conflicting positions and interests by fixing commonly acknowledged metrics (Fisher et al., 1991). Thus, these techniques or principles allow for achieving agreement in integrative negotiations providing both parties with means for establishing their interests and goals.

Conclusion

In summary, negotiation strategies and techniques provide negotiators with a choice of means for achieving agreement. While some negotiations might be simple in their nature and tasks, involve a small number of agents, and pertain to insufficient consequences, others might relate to strategically important issues. Similarly, labor and management are particularly dependent on negotiations since issues of collective decision-making are resolved by parties communication. Therefore, different strategic approaches and techniques of negotiation help to achieve an agreement that would satisfy the interests of all sides. Distributive and integrative negotiation strategies constitute two main approaches with distributive applied to single-issue bargaining and integrative method pertaining to complex or multiple issues. The application of specific techniques plays an essential role in satisfying negotiators interests as outcomes of bargaining.

References

Carrell, M. R., & Heavrin, C. (2013). Labor relations and collective bargaining: Private and public sectors (10^th ed.). Pearson.

Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to YES: Negotiating an agreement without giving in (2^nd ed.). Random House Business Books.

Huang, Q., Jiang, F., Lie, E., & Que, T. (2017). The effect of labor unions on CEO compensation. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 52(2), 553-582.

Park, J., Rahman, H. A., Suh, J., & Hussin, H. (2019). A study of integrative bargaining model with argumentation-based negotiation. Sustainability, 11(23), 1-21.

Schaerer, M., Schweinsberg, M., Thornley, N., & Swaab, R. I. (2020). Win-win in distributive negotiations: The economic and relational benefits of strategic offer framing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 87, 103943.

Sebenius, J. K. (2017). BATNA s in Negotiation: Common errors and three kinds of no. Negotiation Journal, 33(2), 89-99.

Yao, J., Zhang, Z., & Liu, L. A. (2020). When there is no ZOPA: Mental fatigue, integrative complexity, and creative agreement in negotiations.Negotiation and Conflict Management Research. Web.

Introduction

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 groups 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 persons 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.

Sac Attorneys. (2022). The advantages and disadvantages of arbitration. Sacattorneys.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 houses 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 sellers 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.

References

Kim, J. Y. (2022). Negotiation statements with promise and threat. Review of Economic Design, 26(2), 149-164. Web.

Morris, G. (2022). Whos involved in the buying and selling of a home? In charge. Web.

The essential guide: Documents you need to sell your house. (n.d.). Sail homes. Web.

Waugh, E. & Rogazc, C. (2022). Which documents do you need to sell a house? Home light. Web.

Your Analysis Of The Negotiation

While writing about the negotiation, there is a need to cite Ramundo (1994, p. 9) who points out that, It is clear that the manager who applies negotiation concepts and techniques in the performance of his managerial tasks enjoys a competitive, career-enhancing advantage over his colleagues.

The negotiation is taking place so that the theater WCT Company can strike a deal with POP Production Company involved in staging live entertainment to stage a comedy, Oceania that appeals to all ages.

The deal is to structure that would be profitable to the theater company compared to its best alternative the Five and Dime a product of UPSTAGE Production Company that only appeals to older audiences whose profit to WCT is estimated to be $100,000.

It is worth noting that the deal will be co-production meaning that the theater company, WCT and POP Production will have to share the costs of the show as well as the ticket revenue. However additional prom catering will be taken by WCT while sell of merchandise such as T-shirts, Caps will go to the coffers of POP production.

1. List the items to be negotiated. If appropriate, feel free to go beyond those specified in the documents you received. (3 points)
   There are a number of items that need to be addressed before the deal is structured and agreed upon.
   1. How to share profit from the show
   2. Lodging and meals issues while the crew is in town
   3. Crew salary
   4. Time the play will be staged (Number of stage play)
2. List the PERIPHERAL elements (other than positions and interests) which may have an impact on the negotiation and explain why. These may include (but are not limited to) emotions, feelings, relationships, cultural variables, etc. (3 points)

While speaking about cultural negotiating behavior, I would like to draw your attention to Hendons affirmation (1996, p. 9) that, The greater the cultural differences, the more likely barriers to communication and misunderstandings become.

So, for this reason, one important element that might have an impact on the negotiation is cultural differences or variables. It is no doubt that each party in the negotiation comes from different cultural settings. As a manager for WCT, I understand that we exhibit an entrepreneurial culture which fully emphasizes on innovation as well as taking risk.

However our counterpart on the other hand is characterized with maintaining loyalty, tradition as well as internal maintenance. This culture is consensual in nature.

For this reason, although my company might go an extra mile in taking risks, POP will only take what is traditional to them, being paid for meals and lodging and their usual salaries. It is worth noting that since the two parties are American based, there would be no serious cultural issues apart from what has been mentioned.

Another issue is relationship between the two parties. Thus, this question is considered to be very important, as Kalbfleisch (1993, p. 1) states that, Interpersonal conflict is not perceived as a single, monolithic phenomenon to relationship parties.

As noted in the case, these two companies have enjoyed the corporation between them and the mutual gains attained are so enormous that no one party would wish to do away with the other. For this reason, it is worth noting that negotiation is all about relationship especially when one party needs the consent of the other to attain its need.

During negotiation I foresee a situation where either of the companies will have to trade-in and give up one or two of their demands, for instance WCT might be compelled to increase the crew salary from $175,000 for the sake of it POP so that the later can easily come to showcase their new play in the coming days.

Similarly, since POP acknowledged that they have had a good relationship with WCT and they have been making profit, they might also give in terms of profit sharing provided the income from sale of merchandise is substantially higher. This will greatly impact on how the two parties will make their choices considering the fact that both need each other in future.

It is also no doubt that feelings and emotion from both sides of the negotiating teams will impact on how the exercise will be carried out. For instance, Bearison (1986, p. 14) states that, Instead, the process of getting things done with words, the task of making good the pragmatics of language, depends on some rather subtle but robust skills for negotiating the intended meanings of our utterances in interaction with others.

It has been observed that emotions influences how one makes sense of his or her surrounding since it is part of intangible needs especially when negotiating. In this case, my company WCT would feel that it has gotten the best deal in terms of maximum profit.

Considering the fact that am capable of handling my feeling and emotions by always using polite words, being more creative as well as showing respect for others and showing empathy will help in effectively communicating the views of the company regarding the deal with POP Production Company. On the same note, when feelings and emotion tend to flare, then anger and fear will be eminent.

This might result in loss of trust, narrowing focus from the main objectives of a deal to behaviors that leads to anger and misdirecting the goals and purpose of a deal. However having dealt with POP previously, the two parties have had a positive relationship that has led to building of trust hence making the impact of feeling and emotion not to be an issue of concern.

Another factor that might influence the negotiation is with regards to legitimacy. Once Mcginnis (2009, p. 1) said that, The world does not have a recognized international rulemaker in humanitarian law, and certainly not one with any democratic legitimacy. In spite of the citation, it is doubtful whether legitimacy is considered to be not important value.

The negotiation is related to legitimacy and this will be guided by the blue book value from both sides. It is clear that from WCP no matter the situation, the board of directors will not pay crew salaries exceeding $250,000. On the same note, POP Production will at no time allow the host not to foot the lodging as well as meals bills.

Analysis Of Interests, Objectives And Currencies (both sides)

Items To Be Negotiated

For the cast and crew salary, the board of directors based on the laid down rules, can only release $120,000 this thus is the limit and the opening. However for the target, the value $175,000 was arrived at considering the fact that profit sharing formula has not yet been agreed upon and setting it at that will make POP accept a deal where the profit sharing might not be 50-50 basis.

The lodging and meals opening was arrived as $30,000 since I was willing to provide the cast with all meals but they foot the bills for lodging. The target which is $95,000 was arrived at since it includes everything paid for the cast and crew in terms of lodging and meals applicable only if POP stick on its guns.

Regarding the profits, the lowest that the board of directors can accept is $450,000 which is 50% of the ticket revenue. However, I would like the company to receive 75% of the profit and for that matter; the opening is $675,000 while the target is $550,000. The value is attained after considering the fact that there are hire chances for WCT to foot the lodging and meals bills.

Assumptions about the counterparts TARGETS and LIMITS:

Since we have worked with POP previously, they clearly know that know the salary for a cast and crew of 100. However, since they do not know the amount of revenue that will be generated while I clearly understand the estimate, sharing it half way might be pushed for by the production company that is why the value stands at $450,000.

For lodging and meals, the production company is expecting WCT to full y bear the cost. Based on the hotel rates, the value is approximately $100,000. However, there is a chance that if possible WCT can only foot $30,000 which is meals.

Preparing Your Strategy And Your Negotiation Approach

What alternatives are available to you in this negotiation?

There are two major alternatives in the negotiation, one is to share profits in a 50-50 basis and only foot meals bills. This will result in WCT spending $30,000 and the agreed cast and crew salary which will be $175,000. Another alternative is for my company WCT to pocket 75% of the profit, pay cast and crew $120,000 and fully meet the lodging and meals bills. Another minor alternative is to go by what the other partner has in stake.

Which of these alternatives is your BATNA?

In any negotiation setup, one has to fully prepare himself or the team with a best alternative to be used incase the current one fails. For me, my BATNA will be second one in which WCT to pocket 75% of the profit, pay cast and crew $120,000 and fully meet the lodging and meals bills. This is because WCT will still make profit and maintain the good working relationship with POP production Company.

What assumptions can you make about your counterparts Alternatives and Batna?

The assumptions I hold about POP Production Company are; they will no go anything short of being accommodated and meals fully paid, they also expect crew salary of $120,000 and to share profit in a 50-50 basis

List ALL the questions you plan to ask your counterpart to uncover his/her needs and interests, and to validate or invalidate your assumptions about him/her

• Please let me know your expectation in this deal.
• Is showing your cast Oceania in WCT of benefit to your company, please elaborate
• Are you willing to take in 25% of the profit from ticket revenue?
• Can you foot the bill for cast and crew lodging and meals?

What information do you feel you should PROVIDE to your counterpart?

It would be rational for me to tell the other party that revenue generation from tickets is a subject of the percentage of how the theater room will be full. Additionally I will let them know that the board of directors is only capable of paying them $120,000 in terms of salaries and other expenses.

What information do you feel you should WITHHOLD from your counterpart?

One set of information I will withhold from POP Production Company negotiating team is with regards to the corporate autograph parties which are deemed a special event. The details regarding the income opt to be kept a secret.

What Creative Options do you want to explore during this negotiation? Complete the table below to explain your ideas

List of References

Bearison, D. (1986) Thought and Emotion: Developmental Perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates [online] available from [9 October 2011]

Hendon , R. (1996) Cross-Cultural Business Negotiations. Westport, CT: Praeger. [online] available from [9 October 2011]

Kalbfleisch, P. (1993) Interpersonal Communication: Evolving Interpersonal Relationships. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates [online] available from [9 October 2011]

Mcginnis, J. (2009) Notre Dame Law Review. Democracy and International Human Rights Law [online] available from < Questia. Web> [9 October 2011]

Ramundo, B. (1994) The Bargaining Manager: Enhancing Organizational Results through Effective Negotiation. Westport, CT. [online] available from [9 October 2011]

Introduction

The Canwall Case examines the Canadian and Chinese negotiations that were expected to end with a successful sale of equipment but failed. The case represents how cultural differences may influence business and co-working and shows what results an insufficient knowledge of these cultures might bring.

Needs and Benefits

As the Canwall case proves, intercultural business and its success depend on some variables that need to be considered. Barrett (2006) examines such variables as context, time, language, collectivism or individualism, etc. (p. 261). As one can see, none of these variables were considered by the Canadian team which led to a failure. An analysis of this case will help avoid mistakes in the future. Some limitations of the communication can be turned into contributions if the rules of intercultural business relations are considered.

Goals and Boundaries

In the analysis of this case, I will focus not only on the differences between Chinese and Canadian cultures but also on the general distinctions that may cause ineffective business communication. The goal of this analysis is to show that all cultures involved in the business need to consider the possible problems that may appear during the meeting and learn to solve them, especially if those problems are connected to cultural differences. However, I will not be able to provide a detailed description of every cultural issue because such analysis requires a very profound understanding of all aspects of the cultures.

Cultural Frameworks

As it was mentioned above, Barrett provided an analysis of variables that can help conduct a successful business meeting. First of all, context needs to be considered. Barrett (2006) notices that the context can be high or low (p. 262). High-context cultures find interpersonal relationships and nonverbal messages important and rely on them during communication (Barrett, 2006, p. 262). In return, low-context cultures are impatient, used to direct communication and prefer explicit verbal messages (Barrett, 2006, p. 263).

Such cultures find individuality important. Time is also perceived differently: for high-context cultures, it is polychronic (many events occur at once), for low-context cultures, it is monochronic (linear time) (Barrett, 2006, p. 266). At last, collectivism (the community is important) or individualism (an individual is important) also shape the business communication and influence its outcome.

Findings of the Analysis

High-context vs. low-context cultures

As the Canwall case has shown, the deal failed because both teams, the Canadian and the Chinese, did not consider the cultural differences. The Canadians supposed that politeness and warm reception were indications of success, while the Chinese did not realize that the Canadian team relied on a direct form of communication.

Collectivism and individualism

It was unclear and perhaps confusing for the Canadians why ten Chinese showed up at their presentation. However, it was a sign of predominant collectivism in the Chinese culture. The Chinese discussed the directors employee to understand what relationships there were between them; the Canadians missed that and considered it a topic unrelated to business.

Time

Time is perceived differently by the cultures. High-context culture regards time as a state of being. That is why the Chinese did not rush to discuss the sales but preferred to get acquainted with the Canadians (ORourke and Tuleja, 2008, p. 136). The Canadians, in return, did not plan their trip according to the cultural preferences of Chinese and ran out of time.

Language

As it was stated in the case, the Canadian team did not have an interpreter, so the Chinese offered help. However, an interpreter should be familiar with the team and, preferably, work in it to know the insights. This mistake also influenced the deals outcome.

Recommendations

The variables discussed above always need to be considered because any mistake or misunderstanding may be fatal for the business communication. The differences between high and low-context cultures are of utter importance because they influence other variables such as perception of information, time, community, etc. The representatives of both cultures should not dismiss the rules and traditions of others to extract advantages.

References

Barrett, D. (2006). Leadership communication. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

ORourke, J., & Tuleja, E. (2008). Module 4: Intercultural communication for business. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Introduction

Living in an area can be overwhelming, especially if one does not have funds to cater to all the expenses associated with the place. In most cases, parents prefer a situation where you stay within the homestead, and if you have to vacate, it is either after you have secured a job or schooling in a far state. This was my situation before deciding to stay with my parents while undertaking my O level studies.

Personal Story

On 24 of April, dad and I entered into an intense negotiation to convince him that I was grown-up enough to stay in the city while studying. A friend of mine had a similar situation, he was doing well by staying near the school and maybe reuniting with their families after their studies. At first, I thought it was a bad idea to engage my father about the school issue. However, after scrutinizing everything, it was evident that the move could boost my grades as I would have more time to study.

After finishing on everything that was required for me to leave our home and stay in the city to take my studies, I thought of telling my parents about the plan. The plan involved choosing a perfect time when everyone was present. Luckily, my mother supported me, and she was ready to help me out. However, when my dad heard about it, he just nodded his head and promised to respond later. I thought it was a good idea thus gave him ample time to respond positively.

Several days passed, and my dad had not spoken anything concerning the request. One day after evening dinner, he called me and asked me to explain the plans concerning my education. I had to explain how inconvenient it has been for me commuting daily to and from school. I explained how difficult it was to concentrate in the morning due to fatigue and the disturbances one gets as one travels to school. Furthermore, other issues were poor performance in school and my plans to boost my grades. I remember mentioning my poorly performing friends, but after embracing the strategy of staying near the school compound, they have been performing very well. When explaining all these, my dad was busy jotting something on a paper. I thought he was trying to count the cost for moving from our home to the nearest city to facilitate my studies.

Unfortunately, he was not in for the idea and proposed initiating the transfer process of moving me from the school to a nearby institute that was doing well. Often he could explain the cost incurred to ensure that I am safe and sound while taking my studies away from home, especially at my age. He also explained on how I might not improve my studies to a significant extent that would guarantee the funding of my plans. He insisted that embracing my project would be difficult for him, especially in ensuring that all of us as a family are safe. He also quoted cases of gun violence that have been on the rise and raised many concerns over my security. Although he was in a position to fund everything, his security concerns changed and I had to vacate.

I promised him to maintain constant communication and raise the alarm in case of anything messy. I tried telling me how my schoolmates had not experienced such a situation which was the same case with me. I even had to call a friend who had embraced the idea and used him to convince my dad. However, it was as if my efforts were falling on deaf ears, for he was not ready to change his mind. I had to involve my mum and use her to change my dads attitude. However, although my mum tried to explain why the idea could be productive, my dad remained firm. His primary concern was not my efforts to get a good grade, but he was profoundly concerned about my security and well-being.

Relevant Concepts

Some of the concepts related to the above case include:

Strategy

A strategy refers to an action plan designed to achieve a long-term goal. It is the art of directing or planning overall stakeholders into achieving something. In the above case, the techniques and the expectations were relevant (Doran et al. 730). However, it is as if the strategy used to bring up the argument failed in one way or another. The father figure, in this case, was not entirely convinced of the need to embrace the plan of vacating. Even though the father figure was in an excellent position to adopt the program and fund it for them later, his security concerns carried the day. There is no way he could have changed his mind. Some of the strategies used to try and change his mind included telling him about the plans benefits, an assurance of safety through examples, and using other third parties to try and chip in. All the third parties tried convincing him, but nothing worked.

Integrative Tactics

Integrative tactics refer to an interests-based argument where all parties are involved in settling the dispute in question for a win-win situation. In this case, a win-win situation will be achieved by creating a peaceful environment at home even after engaging in a strong argument (Amara 694). The father figure, in this case, had security concerns because of love. There have been reports on gun violence in the state. Therefore, leaving a young lad to live in a city without guaranteed security would be wrong. Furthermore, improving ones grade is critical and everyone would love a situation where their kids excel in school. However, such efforts in most cases would result in family divisions. The best thing is to go for peace and create a problem in the family where everyone feels at ease with each other despite their differences.

Distributive Tactics

Distributive tactics are any policy that allows parties involved in a negotiation to claim the value of the talks at the expense of all the other parties involved in the case. In most cases, these tactics are closely associated with what is known as handball policies (Worley et. al. 249). Some of the common aspects of this approach include claiming limited authority, intimidation, reluctance, and bluffing.

In most cases, effective negotiations in distributive situations spend a lot of time when preparing to negotiate. They win arguments by using various reasons to support their stand. My dad effectively utilized distributive tactics to win the debate in the above case. In the first case, he did not want to respond immediately, especially after learning that everyone else was optimistic about the idea. Conversely, taking some days to think over a situation provided ample time for reasoning and getting a basis over a particular stand. In this case, my dad brought about the issue of security concerns to explain why he opposed the idea. As a result, he did not initiate any transfer policy at all. This is one of the strategies that most negotiations winners use to convince the other parties of the need to learn their idea and consider other options.

Message Construction

This refers to the art of arranging words to pass a particular message. It is the use of various communication skills to give specific notice to people involved in the negotiation. In the above case, the use of this method has been embraced by the latter. At first, my dad had to look for ample time before responding. Taking time is critical as it allows the involved parties to choose the right words to pass the message.

In most cases, people who respond in a hurry might miss out on something critical that is core in each communication. However, the art of buying some time is crucial as it allowed my dad to raise a concern that had never crossed my mind. The mention of gun violence among the security concerns changed everything. The aspect indicates that the art of taking time was critical in constructing a message that changed the whole thing. This is key in any negotiation as the parties who embrace such procedures usually win the argument.

Concessions

It refers to the issue that is granted, especially after making a demand. Although the concession is not presented in the above case, the parties made the necessary demands (McKibben 911). For instance, I was critical in requesting my parents to support my transfer to the nearest city to boost my performance. I was willing to leave the family and create my own time left to excel in the upcoming examinations. However, the concession was not granted as my dad was unwilling to fund and initiate the necessary plans. A settlement was arrived at after all the parties involved came to an agreement. In this case, my dad was not willing to comply with the idea of having me out of the homestead for studies. Although my mum had agreed, there were no valid reasons to change my dads mind so that he could grant the concession.

Unfolding of the Results

After a long and comprehensive discussion, I had to comply with my dads reprimands and forego all my plans. One of the concepts that enhanced this is the integrative tactic. In this case, peace in our family was the number one priority. After an analysis, it was clear that moving out of the family would do us more harm than good. One aspect that could curtail the situation is that my mum was willing to support the idea, but my dad was not ready to help with the concept. Such a minor issue could divide the family into two. Therefore, the best thing to do to unite the family was to forego the idea.

Initially, I thought my parents would embrace the idea. The art of timing and using relevant examples to explain my plan appeared to be one of the best strategies that would guarantee a concession. I chose to communicate my ideas after a family dinner. I thought this strategy would ideally convince my parents to support me fully. However, it appears as if my dad outwitted me by choosing not to respond immediately. The art of seeking more time to reason gave my dad an opportunity of thinking out and came up with a response that changed everything.

My dad seemed to have mastered the strategy of message constrictions. Research studies show that people who succeed or excel in any negotiation embrace the art of constructing their message with uttermost care and reasoning. Most of them are not fast to respond to situations, and they opt to take more time to analyze everything. These are the significant aspects that allow them to convey a message that enhances them to win a negotiation. For instance, my dad had a good time convincing our family otherwise in this case. Initially, all of us believed that the art of moving out was the best idea. However, once our dad raised an issue with security, we had to think otherwise and argue about how security issues affect us as a nation. Cases of gun violence have been on the rise, and we cannot afford to take it lightly.

The other aspect that caused me to change my mind is that I adored living in a peaceful family rather than excelling in a jeopardized one. Although I had tried to convince my dad that there is ample security within the school after reasoning on issues that relate to gun violence, I had to forgo my plans. If I had remained adamant about my project, mum could have supported me, but there could be struggles in the family. Funding my vacation required a lot of funds that could only be sourced from dad. Therefore, there was no way I could stick to my plans without funds, and yet I had to depend on a source that was against the idea. Embracing peace in the family and forgetting about the plans of moving out were the only options left. I had to comply and hope that despite the challenges I was going through as I sought more knowledge, I would still excel in my studies and, above all, fulfil my destinies.

Arriving at a concession cannot be achieved when all the parties are not in agreement. A concession is reached when one party convinces the other of the need to comply and take a particular stand. In this case, a concession would have given me an opportunity of vacating the house and moving to the city for my studies. Unfortunately, not all parties were willing to support the idea. Apart from that, security issues were also discussed at length. Since my dad was unwilling to conform and change his stand, we had to forego the pursuit of the concession and choose peace. The unity and peace meant a lot as compared to the art of excelling in academism and leaving our family in a jeopardized situation.

Lessons Learnt

One of the lessons learned from the situation is that proper strategy is critical in winning a negotiation. This includes effective timing when communicating an idea and choosing the correct words. Besides planning well and using the right strategies, it can be overwhelming to win a discussion unless one uses the right words. Therefore, timing and proper wording are critical in enhancing a win in any negotiation.

Even after using the correct words and embracing the right strategies, such as timing, a concession cannot be granted without the parties in a negotiation agreeing. This aspect means that an agreement is critical in any negotiation. All the involved sectors must agree and arrive at a common goal that would guarantee a win-win situation. The parties involved must agree to ensure equality and fairness. For instance, having peace in the family was more paramount than getting consent in the above case. There is no way I could leave my family in battles to go to the city to seek more knowledge and fail in the long run. I had to sacrifice and forego all my plans to boost peace in my family.

The other lesson I learned from the negotiation is that taking ones time before responding to an argument is very important. For instance, my dad did not respond immediately. He took a couple of days as he reason on what to do. After a few days, his response changed everything, and we had to adapt his ideas and embrace family peace. If I had taken some time to reason out over my actions, the chances are that I could have used the right strategy to approach my dad, and maybe he could have funded my plans. Unfortunately, I had less time to consult here and there, and in the long run, I had to cancel my plans and stick to the initial goal of leaving home for school daily. Therefore, this is a lesson learned in a hard way.

Perception of the Other Party

In this case, the other parties were my parents, more so my dad. In the first place, he appreciated that I was willing to go an extra mile to improve my grades. In addition, he appreciated the fact that I was proving to be a grown-up and doing what other people would not think of doing. However, his love would not allow him to let me out at such an age. The aspect means that he took the whole responsibility as a parent would take to protect their family. From his stand, we had to comply as he is the head of the family. In addition, his efforts would only be appreciated by complying with his wise plans. Therefore, to him, safety was much more precious compared to a good grade.

Conclusion

A negotiation should end up with a mutual agreement that ensures that all the parties involved in the discussion are satisfied. The party that wins a negotiation must present its case well and use the correct words to convince the other parties. An agreement should benefit all the parties involved. For instance, in this case, as the warring parties, we had to embrace peace and continue living in harmony as we sought to advance in all ways. The information stated in this paper might be a useful step by step guideline, that might be utilized in order to further deepen ones understanding of ins and outs of all sorts of negotiations.

Work Cited

Doran, Adele, Peter Schofield, and Tiffany Low. Womens mountaineering: accessing. DOI: 10.1057/s41262-020-00206-6

McKibben, Heather Elko. What do I get? How do states negotiation alternatives influence the concessions they receive in multilateral negotiations? European Journal of International Relations 26.3 (2020): 896-921.

Worley, Timothy R., and Marina R. Shelton. Workfamily conflict, relational turbulence mechanisms, conflict tactics and marital satisfaction. Journal of Applied Communication Research 48.2 (2020): 248-269.

Introduction

It seems apparent that negotiations and bargaining are quite intersected and interdependent categories. One who aims to sell a product successfully is to take into account the most prominent findings and ideas from the mentioned areas. However, the number of negotiation theories is relatively high, and at times, it is difficult to figure out and apply an appropriate one when it comes to a bargain. Thus, it might be vital to conduct continuous research on the concepts that are provided by both scholarly dimensions and notable practices that resulted in profits and success. It might be supposed that the theory of human needs is among the most noticeable approaches that are commonly applied in negotiations and bargaining. In this paper, the essence of human needs theory within the scope of the process of negotiating and bargains, as well as its limitations, will be discussed.

The Essence of Human Needs Theory

Among the most significant classifications of human needs is the one made by Maslow. He suggested that there are five main categories of these needs: basic physiological needs, security needs, social needs, respect needs, and the need for self-fulfillment. One of the highlights of Maslows theory implies that higher-order needs for respect and self-realization give the biggest impetus to motivation (Cherry, 2019). They increase when they are satisfied, while the needs of lower levels become less intense as they are met. Maslow believed that these needs are something like instincts and play a significant role in motivating behavior. Physiological needs, the need for security, and social needs were called the needs of the deficit  this means that they appear due to deprivation. Satisfying these needs is required in order to get rid of unpleasant sensations or prevent negative consequences. Maslow called the needs of the upper levels of the pyramid the needs of growth. They appear not because of the absence of anything, but because of the desire to grow as a person.

The above theory has served as a foundation for many scholarly investigations. Based on the concept of Maslow, John Burton developed his own conflict resolution version of basic human needs, significantly different from the original (Beitzel, 2019). However, these differences are out of focus of the discussion, and the critical point here is that Burton considered negotiations as a process of meeting needs. It is among the primary assumptions of his theory of human needs (Grace, 2015). Communication is to be effective  it should be the purposeful transmission of information, as well as the receipt and interpretation of it precisely in the form in which it was transmitted. With the subsequent use of information, its initial nature should not be distorted but should influence the formation and change of values, interests, and goals. Whether communication will be used in a cooperative or conflict relationship depends on its content and on the understanding of this content.

The Theorys Applications in Negotiations and Bargaining

Needs and their satisfaction is the common denominator that people hope to come as a result of negotiations. If people do not have unmet needs, there would be no point in negotiations. This is also true in cases where the need is reduced to maintaining the status quo. At least two parties are needed for negotiations: the buyer and seller of real estate, the trade union and administration, the directors of the two companies, agreeing on the terms of the merger. Each of them cares about his or her interests to a great extent. Information on needs can be vital to developing effective negotiation techniques (Cheng & Shi, 2019). If one knows the theory of needs, he or she can accurately determine the interests of the parties. Moreover, this theory draws attention to the benefits and situational models that encourage the opposite side to look for alternative methods to make adjustments to their actions and counteractions.

As already mentioned, there is a specific hierarchy, that is, a sequence of interests in descending order of importance. The theory of needs makes it possible to evaluate the effectiveness of any negotiation action correctly and, at the same time, provides a large selection of options (Spangle & Isenhart, 2003). If one knows the relative weight of each need, it is easier to choose the appropriate ways to meet it. The methodology that prioritizes interests is the most effective; the more urgent the need, the more effective will be its use in negotiations. The needs sometimes  and even often  exist in an unconscious form. Caring for the satisfaction of their needs, people can act under the influence of emotions, and not the arguments of reason. The theory of needs gives us a structure to help streamline and determine the relative value of interests and possible actions aimed at satisfying them.

According to the theory, everything a person does is motivated by a desire to satisfy one or another of his or her needs. The understanding of this principle can help to develop a bargaining strategy; the example might be as follows. One has just created the most prominent product in the world. It is a revolutionary offer that will help other companies to reduce production costs by two times. The seller reaches out to potential customers with the following advertising message: The product automates production systems with a new processor and turbocharging. It might be assumed that buyers will not be attracted by such a promotion as no needs or interests that may become satisfied are stated. This seller can have the best product in a market, but if he or she does not convince clients that they need it, there will be no notable success.

When a person thinks about a purchase, first of all, he or she thinks about what this purchase will provide, but not about how it is arranged or how it works. Therefore, the first message that the buyer should hear is to contain information about the benefits that the client will acquire if he or she purchases a product. If the seller is able to identify the advantages of the product or service clearly, then the profits are possible indeed.

Limitations of the Theory

It seems reasonable to note that although the described advantages of the theory, the latter also has a number of limitations. The most apparent one might be formulated as follows: it is not absolutely clear whether all humans have the same hierarch of human needs or not. It means that if one decides to apply the theory to the process of negotiations, he or she will perceive the interests of the other party through the prism of subjectivity (Rubenstein, 2001). It might result in misunderstanding, as well as dissatisfying results of the bargain. Hence, in order to avoid such a mistake, it is essential to learn and explore the hierarchy of interests of the opponent. It might lead to an in-depth understanding of the situation and the rational way to apply the theory.

The following limitation is a direct consequence of the one above. In the case of facing the conflict behavior of the interlocutor, according to the theory, it is essential to understand that this behavior is provoked by an unmet need. In order to stop the alienation of communicators, this need must be satisfied. This understanding can be approached through simple communication  asking questions, sincere interest in answers, empathy and active listening, and other techniques of constructive conversation. The crucial disadvantage here is that the described approach might take too much time with the loss of the object of negotiations. Moreover, the larger the conflict, the more needs can be involved (Azam & Rehman, 2018). Thus, the more thorough the analysis of these needs should be. And if one cannot do it on his or her own, it is vital to turn to an independent person, or mediator, for help. Nevertheless, it seems that the disadvantages are not so critical to reject the benefits of the theory in practice.

Conclusion

To conclude, the human needs theory of Burton is founded on the hierarchy of Maslow and might serve as a great background for constructive negotiations and bargains. The original idea of the concept is that in order to gain maximum benefits from negotiating, it is essential to take into account the interests of the interlocutor. Everyone pursues his or her needs during negotiations; hence, the faster these needs are identified and met, the more productive outcomes might take place. However, several limitations of the theory also occur; first, it is difficult to understand the needs of the other party at times as they are not entirely unified. Second, identifying these needs might be quite a time-consuming process.

References

Azam, A. & Rehman, S. (2018). Assessing human needs theory: An approach to conflict resolution. The Nucleus, 55(3), 128132.

Beitzel, T. (2019) Puzzles, problems and provention: Burton and beyond. International Journal of Peace Studies, 24(1).

Cheng, Q. & Shi, Y. (2019). The promoting effects of psychology in business negotiation. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 10(4), 832837.

Cherry, K. (2019). The 5 levels of Maslows hierarchy of needs. 

Grace, R. (2015). Understanding humanitarian negotiation: Five analytical approaches. 

Rubenstein, R. (2001). Basic human needs: The next steps in theory development. International Journal of Piece Studies, 6(1). 

Spangle, M. & Isenhart, M. (2003). Negotiation: Communication for diverse settings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

In most aspects of our lives, conflicts of interest are bound to arise. Disputes can be healthy for personal and communal development. However, all this is dependent mainly on the matches not being allowed to spiral out of control. As such, negotiation tactics are essential as they provide one with a tool to resolve contentious issues constructively. The negotiation consists of a discussion between parties working towards reaching an acceptable agreement for all involved. Various negotiation styles exist, and each can be effective in a given situation. An awareness of the particular negotiation style that one employs in multiple positions will lead to a person becoming a more skilled and hence effective negotiator. In this paper, I shall set out to illustrate my conflict-handling styles, which fall under collaborative and balanced negotiation, so as to demonstrate that a deeper understanding of ones negotiation techniques can lead to higher chances of success. I shall also highlight the particular circumstances where each of these techniques proved to be a credit to further underpin the value of each style.

Collaborative negotiations are based on shared interests, cooperation, and joint problem-solving. As a collaborative negotiator, one of my primary concerns is to ensure that the other party does not see the negotiation process as being equivalent to giving in to the other sides demands, therefore, compromising their principles. Instead, I aim to restyle the negotiation so that it appears that each side is getting enough of what they want. The critical factor in collaboration is to make compromises and try to resolve the issue in an amicable fashion so as to ensure a healthy future relationship between the parties.

The primary consideration in collaborative negotiations is the safeguarding of future relationship with the other person/group. As such, I tend to emphasize the common interests between the parties when I am engaging in a collaborative negotiation. When both parties in a conflict have some common ground, they will seek to reach a solution that will not alienate them from each other since they both realize that their future relationship may be at stake.

When I employ the collaborative approach, I keep my communication with the other group open and honest. In most cases, this leads to the other party responding in kind, therefore ensuring leading to a situation where we view each other as comrades and not as adversaries fighting for different sides. This attitude brings about a trusting and friendly perspective. I have observed over time that when people are trusting, they tend to lower their guards, and instead of being defensive and suspicious, they give my group the benefit of the doubt and assume that my party is as committed to a beneficial resolution of the issue at hand.

The other approach that I utilize is the balanced approach borrows from both the competitive approach and the collaborative approach of conflict resolution. While the collaborative practice seeks to reach a win-win result for both parties, competitiveness is characterized by having a winner and a loser in the bargaining process. A balanced approach recognizes that the competitive and collaborative systems are not mutually exclusive, and one can indeed take some aspects of each when dealing with a situation. As a skilled negotiator, I, therefore, at times, take the best from both approaches to come up with a mixed strategy that will be most beneficial to my cause. For example, I find the collaborative attributes of trust and mutual respect to be very important in any effort. However, I also aim to achieve the most for my party, a feature of the competitive approach. As such, I am borrowing the desirable attributes of each path leads to the best results.

In my negotiations, I, at times, find myself in situations whereby the other party to the conflict represents opposing interests to those that my party holds. Such problems are also often compounded by a lack of a significant relationship between the parties involved. In such scenarios, a competitive negotiation model would dictate that I try to gain as much as I can for my party, even if at the expense of the opposite side, since the relationship between the parties is not of importance. However, a collaborative approach recognizes that this may be detrimental as it may lead to resentment, animosity, and bad-will by the party, which gets the less favorable bargain. A Collaborative approach will aim at finding some point of common interest so as to make both parties more hospitable to each other. Employing a balanced approach will, therefore, result in the identification of common objectives while at the same time trying to achieve the best deal for my party. This will lead to a resolution of the issue in the most profitable manner for each of the groups without necessarily alienating the other party.

Some of the negotiations that I have handled were conducted between groups of unequal power. In some cases, my group was the stronger party, and as such, adoption of a competitive stance would not only be viable but would also yield the most significant benefit to my group. However, this would lead to the alienation of the other parties. A balanced approach would recognize that despite my party having the upper hand in the particular negotiation, there is no guarantee that the same will hold true in future dealings. As such, future relations may be affected by my using of power to get a better deal. A more longsighted approach would, therefore, be most desirable. This would entail getting the most without employing any tactics that may be deemed as highhanded, thus leading to mutual respect.

Whichever approach is taken, reaching a consensus is key to any negotiation process. The concession is the reaching of a unanimous agreement over the disputed issue. When a collaborative approach is used, the benefit will lead to all parties being winners, and future amicable relations will be preserved. A balanced approach will also yield the same results as the approach also aims for a win-win situation.

Despite my reliance on these two negotiating tactics, I concede that the notion of negotiation is not as simple as being either hard and competitive or soft and cooperative. I appreciate the fact that the best form of negotiation is one that emphasizes being realistic and embracing a practice that is neither opportunistic nor naive. Therefore, the negotiation outcomes that meet enough of my sides interests and, at the same time, accommodate those of the other side are the ones that I seek to achieve in all my negotiating endeavors.

Negotiation tactics are an essential tool for anyone who is involved in conflict management at whichever level. In this paper, I set out to illustrate the negotiation approaches that I employ at various times. From the discussions presented in this paper, it is evident that an appreciation of the different negotiation approaches is essential for one to be an effective negotiator.

Negotiation is the process of discussion aimed at reaching a compromise or a mutually beneficial solution to an issue. It is a complex skill that involves analyzing information and making strategic decisions, often under time pressure. Naturally, there are common mistakes one should try to avoid when negotiating. One fundamental issue is negotiators incorrectly assessing a situations competitiveness (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2016).

Therefore, one should avoid this bias and attempt to explore both the common interests and differences between the negotiating sides to achieve the best outcome (Lewicki et al., 2016). Another significant concern is the first offer in a negotiation, which can affect the course of the entire process. One suggestion to reach more beneficial terms is starting with an exaggerated offer. Although this can lead to negative outcomes, it is generally advantageous (Lewicki et al., 2016). However, when employing this approach, one should also prepare a viable counter-offer in case his or her opponent refuses to negotiate (Lewicki et al., 2016). Overall, a lack of preparation and analysis of the situation is the common unifying theme of errors in negotiations.

Reference

Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2016). Essentials of Negotiation (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.