The process of negotiation implies the implementation of complex procedures-discussions between individuals that have different objectives, especially in politics and business, during which they aim to reach an agreement. In exploring the principles of negotiation, Fisher and Ury suggest that negotiators are people first, which means that the human aspect of the process can be either helpful or disastrous. For instance, when reaching an agreement, parties can become angry at each other, get frustrated, sad, or offended. In bargaining, reaching a consensus, or developing an alternative solution, it is necessary to address the substance of the problem and focus implicitly on procedures that directly deal with them. In solving these issues, it is also imperative to separate them from relationships, which is one of the important recommendations in Getting to Yes.
The authors recommend effective listening as an integral component of negotiations due to the need to understand correctly what each side of the discussion is trying to say. I agree with the recommendation of listening to each other’s points as a fundamental part of effective negotiation for promoting understanding. Also, I agree that when communicating, parties of conflicts must focus not on their positions but rather on interests because specific stances allow them to focus on the problem and facilitate the shaping of compatible interests. Asking oneself questions such as “why?” and “why not?” regarding the identification of interests is recommended as a strategy for shaping one’s side of the narrative. These questions will subsequently lead to further considerations of constructing a person’s side of the argument through such questions as “whose decisions do I want to influence?” and “will I gain or lose support?” “what are the long- and short-term consequences?” and others. I agree with these statements because of the importance of talking about interests within negotiations and the need for parties to work on their reputations and look forward when it comes to seeking an agreement. Inventing options to reach mutual gain for all parties involved in the negotiation is essential. I also agree with the idea that realistic options are necessary within the process of negotiation because they consider the benefits for all parties involved.
The material exploring the recommendations for successful negotiations is useful because it states how one can alter perceptions and behaviors to reach the desired objectives within the process of negotiation. I deeply valued the advice to accept any emotions that come during the negotiation and consider these feelings as inevitable. Making feelings explicit is expected to make negotiations less reactive and more proactive, which is an essential outcome. When the participants of a discussion are free from unexpressed and suppressed emotions, they will be more likely to work on the issue rather than on their personal feelings. I have found such advice unexpected and interesting because the majority of negotiation manuals and ‘how-to’ web pages talk about negotiations as emotion-less procedures, especially between parties that pursue opposing objectives.
It was interesting to read about negotiations as a two-way process that implies collaboration between individuals. In my view, negotiations have always been targeted at achieving a goal that will be most beneficial to one party; however, the authors emphasized the need to find a mutual solution and evaluate arising issues from multiple perspectives. I found value in the breakdown of recommendations for such processes as brainstorming when inventing possible solutions and decisions necessary to implement within the negotiating process. For example, the message “in a brainstorming session, people need not feat looking foolish since wild ideas are explicitly encouraged” is very inspiring. It allows room for error and shows that negotiations allow mistakes and make it possible for people to learn from them.
When applying the recommendations of Getting to Yes to real life, school-associated negotiations come to mind. For example, school leaders are expected to negotiate good learning conditions with school management, ranging from lunches to baseball team uniforms. When preparing for the negotiation, school leaders can implement a brainstorming session together with other students to think about solutions to problems and communicate their desires of the negotiations’ outcomes. During meetings with school managers, leaders should clearly state their interests and seek mutual perspectives together with their ‘opponents.’ It is evident that both sides of the negotiation have similar goals in mind. For instance, increasing students’ knowledge and their learning outcomes during education. Negotiators should look into each other’s goals and interests and find matching points to develop solutions and reach a consensus.
References:
Ignatieff, G., Fisher, R., & Urey, W. (1982). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in Roger Fisher and William Urey. International Journal, 37(4), 649. Web.