The document summarizes an HBR article about investigative negotiation. It discusses five principles of investigative negotiation: 1) Understanding the other side's motives and goals, 2) Figuring out constraints, 3) Viewing demands as a way to understand values, 4) Looking for common ground, and 5) Continuing to learn even if no deal is reached. It provides an example of a negotiation between a pharmaceutical company and supplier where making inaccurate assumptions about motives led to an unnecessary increase in offers until the real motivation was discovered.

1. Investigative Negotiations, HBR article
By Deepak Malhotra and Max.H.Bazerman
Article Summary and Critical Review
Submitted by MuthamilSelvan, Hemachandran.S and Rajeev kumar - Group-3, PGPMX, RAK
Negotiations can hit a brick wall because one party wrongly assumes that they understand the other side’s
motivations and therefore don’t explore them further. In this article, the authors discuss five principles
underlying investigative negotiation and how they can prevent unnecessary breakdowns.Negotiation is at the
heart of human communication. Most conversations are a sale in the making - We are either selling to a yes
or accepting a no in everything we do. Win-Win is seen as the ultimate end to good negotiations.This article
says it is not always the best outcome. It says Investigative negotiation is the solution to it. We need to probe
and ask questions to gather information. WE need to see how can we get information so that we can create
value, resolve conflicts, and reach efficient agreements.
Negotiators often fail to achieve results because they channel too much effort into selling their own position
and too little into understanding the other party’s perspective. To get the best deal, negotiators need to think
like detectives, digging for information about why the other side wants, what it does. Authorspoint out
several skills of good negotiators–mainly their ability to probe and ask questions that illuminate areas of
conflict and expose possible solutions.
Inaccurate assumptions about the other side’s motivations can lead negotiators to propose solutions to the
wrong problems, needlessly give away value, or derail deals altogether. As per the example mentioned in the
article regarding a negotiation of pharmaceutical company with a supplier, the supplier was balking because
a relative’s company needed a small amount of the ingredient to make a local product. But the
pharmaceutical company presumed that the supplier was looking for a premium value for the exclusivity,
they increased their offer,unsuccessfully. Once the real motivation surfaced, they reached a compromise
quickly.
In this article, authors delineate five principles underlying investigative negotiation and show how they apply
in myriad situations. Pretty basic, but nevertheless a reminder of the basics is often very beneficial. And they
provide some illustrations and explanations worth reading.
Understanding the other side’s motives and goals is the first principle of investigative negotiation.
The second is to figure out what constraints the other party faces. Often when our counterpart’s
behavior appears unreasonable, his hands are tied somehow, and we can reach an agreement by helping
to overcome those limitations.

2. Investigative Negotiations, HBR article
By Deepak Malhotra and Max.H.Bazerman
Article Summary and Critical Review
Submitted by MuthamilSelvan, Hemachandran.S and Rajeev kumar - Group-3, PGPMX, RAK
The third is to view demands as a window to understand what the other party values most – and use that
information to create opportunities.
The fourth is to look for common ground; even fierce competitors may have complementary interests
that lead to creative agreements.
Finally, if a deal appears lost, we need to still stay at the table and keep trying to learn more. Even if we
don’t win, we can gain insights into a customer’s future needs, the interests of similar customers, or the
strategies of competitors.Although it’s a good advice, staying at the table can be difficult. If the client has
made the emotional commitment to go elsewhere, they may not want to spend any more time with us,
especially if they feel we are still selling them. Many clients also don’t want to make losing salespeople
feel bad, so their instinct is to stop talking. It takes a real professional to be able to convince the client to
open up after they’ve already decided.