Ilia State UniversityFlexibility Of Master Negotiator PRESENTED BY ZAUR NATSVLISHVILI
In negotiations Flexibility is the greatest assets of negotiator. So, on the road to greater negotiating mastery one of the most important goals to achieve is to learn to be more flexible, and willing to switch out of you own comfort zone if necessary.
To master every negotiating situation and resolve varied conflicts, you need to adjust your approach to each. Before the negotiation, you should always take a moment to think about what type of negotiation you are entering. Don’t just start negotiating.There are many ways to negotiate. Your flexibility is essential to your ability to master each of the negotiating situations comfortably and competently!
Determining the Importance of Outcome and Relationship To choose right strategy in negotiation you need to address these two important factors: How will the negotiationWhat might you win or process, and the specific lose in substantive outcome settlement affect you relations with the otherissues in negotiation? player now and in the future?Every time you approach the beginning of a negotiation, think about the outcome, and think about the relationship !
Every time you approach the beginning of a negotiation, think about the outcome, and think about the relationship !You are buying a vehicle for you You are buying the vehicles for you at auction from dealer business from company You may never have met the seller before and do not You expect to work with this person expect to have a continuing on deals in the future relationship Focus on: Focus on:
Examining Relationship Concerns If maintaining a good relationship with the other party is important to you, then you should negotiate differently than if the relationship is unimportant! How do you think about the importance of the relationship? list of relationship factors:• Is there a past relationship with this other person? If so, what did you learn about the other person or organization?• Has that past relationship generally been positive or negative (that is, have the two of you have gotten along well or poorly in the past)?• Is there likely to be a future relationship between you and the other party?• How committed is each party to the relationship? How hard are you and the other person willing to work to keep the relationship strong and productive? If commitment has been low historically on either side, then be suspicious about the future.• How much interdependence is there in the relationship—that is, how much does each of you need this particular other person to have your needs met, as opposed to having other ways to get your needs met? If you depend on each other to any significant degree, then rate this relationship high on your importance scale.• How much free and open communication is there between the parties (if communication is poor, rate the relationship lower)? Can the communication be improved?• How much can the other party affect your reputation among current and future business contacts? In business, people learn a lot about others through informal comments and gossip. While you may expect very little direct contact with the other party, if he or she can have a major positive or negative impact on your reputation, you ought to worry about how you treat him or her in the current negotiation.
Sometimes there are situations when relation is very important, butemotions contaminating it. There are few ways to take the emotions down:One simple way is to tell the other party you want to improve relationship.Take time away from the specific negotiations to get to know the other person better: - Talk about subjects on which you have common interests. - Spend time talking with the other about how she sees you and what you can do to increase her trust and confidence in you. - If she is upset, find out why and what you may have done to make things worse. Apologize and offer to change or improve your behavior. - You may wish to offer small concessions, which you hope will be seen as goodwill gestures and will help rebuild the level of trust.But at the same time, try to repair the relationship with comments and dialoguethat do not necessarily require you to make any major sacrifices on pursuingyour negotiation goals.
Managing Outcome Concerns How important is it for you to achieve a Do you need to win on all points to good outcome in this negotiation? gain the advantage? May be the outcome not really Is the outcome of only matter at all? moderate importance? Often we find ourselves involved in relatively unimportant negotiations that threaten to take up too much of our time and energy. Sometimes the matter is very important to the other party but not to you, and you have to avoid getting caught up in becoming overly concerned about her perspective to the exclusion of considering your own!
Often we find ourselves involved in relatively unimportant negotiations that threaten to take up toomuch of our time and energy. example A supervisor spends a lot of time focusing on a A supervisor spends a less attention than good particularly difficult employee who performs performers, who are doing the bulk of the work below standards, complains a lot, and refuses to and carrying the department, office, or business take responsibility for his actions. on their shoulders. The manager who is caught up in dealing with a poor performer would probably do better to limit his time on this problem and remember to spend more time working with and managing the good performers, so that they don’t become disillusioned and stop performing well or, worse, leave. Managers need to look at the future performance potential of each employee and give more negotiating time and supervisory attention to those with the greatest potential, not the least. THIS WILL BE GOOD FOR HIS BUSSINESS!
Does the negotiation affect your ongoing costs of business?This is often the most important question to ask beforechoosing your negotiating styleExamples of negotiations that affect ongoing costs of businessand therefore warrant a high level of concern about the outcomeand an assertive approach to the negotiation:• Salary negotiations, which usually spill over by affecting salary levels of multipleemployees, not just the one you’re negotiating with. Even if salaries are meant to beconfidential, employees often compare notes and know pretty well who is making what.• Per-unit costs of anything purchased repeatedly. Even a dollar saved canmake a big difference if multiplied by thousands of transactions. Keep a sharp eye outfor this multiplier effect, and negotiate hard whenever it applies. If you are arestaurant and negotiating with a laundry for cleaning tablecloths and napkins,twenty-five cents a tablecloth can make a big difference over a year.•Agreements that reach into the future. If you are negotiating a one-yearlease, your level of concern for the outcome may not need to be as high as for aten-year lease. Assert strongly when the time frame is longer than a year. If youcan’t win the concessions you want, try to switch the time frame to somethingshorter. There’s nothing worse than being locked into an unfavorable or expensivedeal or contract for a long period of time. If you are uncertain about the future,negotiate a current deal that can be revisited at some defined time in the future.• Fixed and other ongoing costs, since you have to pay them no matter how well or poorly your business does.If you are paying too much for your basic utilities, for example, you won’t be able to make a profit when times aretough and sales are slow. Of course, all costs are important, but fixed and other repeated costs—rent and utilities, forexample—are strategically more important than one-time costs and should be approached with great care in anybusiness negotiation. Unfortunately, most managers do just the opposite: they tend to ignore or give little attentionto fixed costs, often assuming these can’t be negotiated. (Everything can be negotiated)
Choosing a Negotiating Strategy• By considering the relative importance of bothoutcome and relationship, you are able toadapt your game to each negotiating situation. • Each deal is different and each opponent may be different; you will get better results by flexing your style to suit the situation.
• Avoiding (lose-lose). In this strategy, shown in the lowerleft of the diagram, the priorities for both the relationship andthe outcome are low. Neither aspect of the negotiation isimportant enough for you to pursue the conflict further. Youimplement this strategy by withdrawing from active negotiationor avoiding negotiation entirely.• Accommodating (lose to win). This strategy isrepresented in the upper left of the diagram, where theimportance of the relationship is high and the importance of theoutcome is low. In this situation, you back off your concern forthe outcome to preserve the relationship; you intentionally “lose”on the outcome dimension in order to “win” on the relationshipdimension.• Competing (win-lose). The lower right of the diagramrepresents high concern for the outcome and low concern for therelationship. You use this strategy if you want to win at all costand have no concern about the future state of the relationship.• Collaborating (win-win). The upper right part of the diagramdefines a strategy where there is a high priority for both therelationship and the outcome. In this strategy, the parties attempt tomaximize their outcomes while preserving or enhancing therelationship. This result is most likely when both parties can find aresolution that meets the needs of each.1• Compromising (split the difference). In the middle is an area we call a compromising, or “satisfying,” strategy. Itrepresents a combination approach that is used in a variety of situations. For example, it is often used when the partiescannot achieve full collaboration but still want to make some progress toward achieving outcome goals or take some actionsto preserve the relationship. It is also often used when the parties are under time pressure and need to come to a resolutionquickly, or do not have the energy to work toward a fully collaborative agreement. Each party will give in a bit to find acommon ground.
Matching and Meshing Styles We have explored So far we’ve focused on how to choose the best hownegotiating game by considering two key factors: how important outcome and relationship might be important the is to be gained from this in an upcoming negotiation.negotiation, and how important the past, present, and future is with the opponent. And you’ve seen us use this two-factor model to prescribe which of the five styles to use: You won’t go wrong with this simple but powerful two-factor model. Nevertheless, there are times when you might want to refine it by considering some additional factors as well. Each strategy has both advantages and disadvantages that can have an impact on what strategy to adopt.
Personal PreferencesAnalyze your personal preferences for the various strategies.You will probably be more successful using a strategy thatfeels comfortable.Based on experience and history, we might develop strongbiases toward being competitive or collaborative orcompromising or accommodating or avoiding in conflictsituations—and other biases that may lead us to not use theseapproaches, even when the situation would dictate that they arethe most appropriate.Your preferences for a particular strategy are also influenced by your commitment to certain basicvalues and principles. These may be harder in some ways to define than your goals or priorities.Your willingness to use (or not use) certain strategies might be influenced by things like the following:• How much you value truth, integrity, manners, and courtesy• Whether respect is an important issue to you• How important fair play is to you, and, for that matter, howyou define “fair”• How much of your ego (your reputation or image) is involvedin this negotiation and how concerned you are about how youwill see yourself—or others will see you—if you get what youwant—or don’t get what you want
Matching or Mismatching the Other’s StyleThink about your own style as it interactswith the other party’s style, and considerthe possible consequences. What will bethe effect of such a combination? Note that based on your diagnosis of the other person’s style, you can intentionally choose to either match this person’s style or mismatch in a way that helps you accomplish your primary objectives.
Avoiding Accommodating Competing Collaborating CompromisingAvoiding Both parties avoid Accommodator Competitor will Collaborator Compromiser pursuing their goals shows strong dominate, or shows shows some on the issues and concern for the avoider will escape. strong concern concern for both do not take any Avoider, particularly Avoider attempts to for issues and action to the relationship; minimize both issues and relationship; endanger the avoider attempts to interaction, while the avoider tries to Relationship Minimize competitor tries to relationship, escape. interaction. engage. while Compromiser avoider tries to may give escape. Avoider up, or avoider may give up. may engage.Accommodating Both parties avoid Competitor Collaborator Compromiser pursuing their pursues own goals shows strong shows some goals on the issues, on the issues, while concern for both concern for both give in to the the accommodator issues and issues and others’ goals, and tries to make the relationship; relationship; try to smooth over competitor happy. accommodator accommodator the relationship Competitor usually tries to make the tries to make the concerns. wins big. Collaborator compromiser happy. happy. Relationship Relationship will should be very Improve. strong, but the Compromiser collaborator may may entice the achieve better accommodator to results. focus on issues.
Avoiding Accommodatin Competing Collaborating Compromising gCompeting Both parties Collaborator Competitor shows pursue their goals shows strong some concern for on the issues and concern for both both issues and ignore any concern issues and relationship, for the relationship, while relationship. while competitor compromiser only Conflict and only pursues pursues issues. mistrust are likely. issues. Competitor competitor usually wins, and usually wins, and both parties both parties become become competitive competitive.Collaborating Both parties Compromiser pursue their goals shows some on the issues; they concern, while show strong concern collaborator shows for the others’ goals strong concern on and sustaining trust both substance and a good and relationship. relationship Good compromise likely at a minimum.Compromising Both parties pursue their goals on the issues in a limited way and attempt to do no harm to the relationship.
Can You Make a “No Strategy” Choice?The no-strategy approach has somedistinct advantages:•You get a chance to find out how your opponentwants to negotiate first, which may tell you a lotabout your opponent.•It also keepsyou from making a commitment to a strategythat may not work or get completed, forexample, to be accommodative while the otheris being competitive. However, a no-strategy If you know that you care about the relationship, choice is often the lazy or the outcome, or both (or neither), negotiator’s way of and begin to plan around it. If you avoiding a key part of the are proactive about strategy choice, you are much planning and preparation more likely to get what you want than if you wait process for the other to initiate action. you can always adapt your strategy later as necessary.
As you can see there are multiple styles orstrategies, and the master businessnegotiator assesses the situation beforechoosing which one to use May you are comfortable with one style than another Because we all have our preferred styles, it’s easy to always use the same approach. But best advice can be summed up in one simple phrase: ASSESS TO CHOOSE THE BEST APPROACH BEFORE YOU START NEGOTIATING!