In it harms relations. I experienced it in

In Getting Past No, Author gave a strategy for negotiating with stubborn opponent. They said that there are ways of dealing with uncooperative behaviour. Author in “Getting to Yes” told that agreements should be wise to maintain relationships with parties. Author said that negotiations are generally happen in form of positional bargaining in which each party bargain over a price as per their position. And I believe it is an inefficient way of doing agreement as it disregard the parties’ interests. It leads to stubbornness between the parties and it harm relationship for long run. So people should use principled negotiation which provides a more efficient way of negotiation. Author gave four principles of negotiation. First one is to:

Separate the people from the problem- Author said that people involved personally in negotiations with emotions and forget about the interests. There main aim in the end is to win the negotiation and in long run it harms relations. I experienced it in my negotiation activities- it happens generally that people take it on their ego state and forget about outcome instead they start playing the blaming game. So it is very important to learn from this principle that one should come up with the result which have both interests. Moreover people should understand other feelings & emotions and should see their interests as well. And most importantly parties should communicate effectively. Even in my negotiation activity I had done the same mistake that I was busy in planning my own responses while other party was speaking which I realized after reading this principle that it is important to listen actively.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

In “Getting Past no”  it has been said that if a party trying to play with you with powerful emotions other one should “go to the balcony” means he should not react. Inspite of striking back one should keep mental balance b keeping emotions away and should view the situation practically by identifying the (BATNA). So my understanding is that one should never make a decision on the spot rather should take time to review the settlement.

CONTRAST- In “Getting to yes” – It has been said that one should understand other emotions but in “Getting past no” it has been said that one should understand the emotional tactics of other side and should not react.

Connect- Connect between the two is that to play on middle ground, understand others interests and then see if they are genuine or not,  if they are genuine consider them but if they are playing emotionally on wrong grounds then follow” Go to balcony rule”

 2) Secondly author said that good agreements should be focus on the interests of parties not on their positions. Because if you decide it in terms of positions then one party has to lose the battle. I believe that people should discuss their interests to create a motivating environment and moreover if they found that others are paying attention to their need as well they will feel more comfort. One important thing that I have learned over my negotiation activity is that people should keep a clear focus and should remain open for different offers because sometimes they are adamant to the thing they have entered with. So it’s important to bring the pros and cons on table to make other party feel that lot of other options exist.

Connect- In “Getting Past No” also it has been said that reframe the dispute in terms of interests rather than positions. They also suggested the way to ask open-ended questions to get clear opponent’s interests and if they resist, ask them “why not”.

3) Thirdly author said that Generate variety of options before settling on an agreement. In this obstacles to generate options for solving a problem have been identified. In my learning to solve the obstacles people should sit and brainstorm their ideas to find all possible way of solving the problems. They should first state the problem then analyse it, and further should consider approaches and actions. Each party should try to give proposals that are equally fair to the other side so that the other don’t feel betrayed.

In “Getting Past No” it has been asked to “build them a golden bridge” to pull them from their position to an agreement. One should always understand opponent logic and should not avoid intangible comforts such as identity and security.

Connect- Both says that options should be generated. Ask other party for their ideas and productive criticism. Both the books believe that at times third party is a better option because offer coming from the opponent party is sometimes unacceptable but the same offer coming from third party is understandable.

4) Fourth agreement should be based on objective criteria- The parties should use objective criteria to resolve their differences when interests are directly opposed. In objective criteria parties should agree which criteria is best for both of them as it should be both genuine and concrete. There are three points to keep in mind when using objective criteria. First ask for the reasoning behind the other party’s suggestions. Second, each party must keep an open mind. Third, negotiators must never give in to pressure, threats, or bribes.

My understanding from “Getting to Yes” is when the other party Is more powerful than a weaker party should not give the bottom line and instead the weaker party should concentrate on consider their best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA). Because negotiation should produce something better than the results one can obtain without negotiating. I found that before learning BATNA concept we were simply negotiating blindly and after learning it helped me in negotiating with a powerful person and it also helped me in raising the minimum bar.

But in “Getting Past No” says that power should be used to bring opponent in to senses. The aim is to tell them that agreement is the best option for them and keep asking them what you will do if agreement does not happen. Give them a reality check that what they are losing.

Connect- In “Getting to Yes” it is more tilted towards the helping the weaker party that how they should do negotiation and what to reveal and what not. It is basically helping in making weaker party strong in points while in “Getting Past No” it has been said how to handle stubborn party; how to show them reality and how one should defuse their tricks.

In conclusion when the party don’t use principled negotiation and makes personal attacks to maximize their advantages other party should not counter attack in respond to positional bargaining. Further when parties use immoral tricks to gain an advantage in negotiations; others should avoid it and should put all the claims in writing. The principled negotiator should identify the positional pressure tactics when parties ask to take the offer or leave it. The principled party should decline to the tricks or should avoid accepting finality of the offer, instead keep trying with options.