top of page

Student Group

Public·5 members
Greyson Bell
Greyson Bell

Getting To Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without G... LINK

INKED is a how-to guide for sales negotiations. Jeb Blount identifies common mistakes salespeople make when trying to compromise with clients and outlines strategies to closing better deals. The book insists that the key to negotiating in sales settings is emotional discipline, and gives rules and a framework for arranging agreements. Chapters touch on topics such as presenting the strongest possible case, overcoming objections, establishing a power position, and using various forms of leverage. INKED presents an arsenal of techniques sales professionals can draw upon to guide and prevail in industry negotiations.

Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without G...


Many business negotiation books stress gaining the upper hand and getting the better deal. The Art of Persuasion: Winning Without Intimidation is a guide to making deals without strong-arming the other party. Bob Burg explains ways to negotiate in a manner that benefits both sides and makes opponents feel comfortable and satisfied with the agreed-upon terms. The guide suggests ways to make others feel important and how to approach difficult people. The book includes stories and examples that show these theories in practice. The Art of Persuasion: Winning Without Intimidation treats negotiation as an art that requires empathy, subtlety, and skill, and outlines techniques that help aspiring practitioners master the craft.

Introduction: Negotiation is a fact of life, a basic means of getting what you want fromothers, a way of handling differences. Negotiation is hard to do well.Soft negotiators ... want to avoid personal conflict, make concessions readily andreach an amicable resolution. They are often exploited and feel bitter afterwards.Hard negotiators ... see it a contest of wills, the side taking the more extremeposition and holding out longer fares better. He wants to win, finds negotiatingexpensive and exhausting, and hurts his relationship with the other side.

The reason you negotiate is to produce something better than the results you canobtain without negotiating. That is your BATNA. It is the only standard that willprotect you from:(1) accepting terms that are too unfavorable(2) rejecting terms that are in your interests to accept

Since its original publication nearly thirty years ago, Getting to Yes has helped millions of people learn a better way to negotiate. One of the primary business texts of the modern era, it is based on the work of the Harvard Negotiation Project, a group that deals with all levels of negotiation and conflict resolution. Getting to Yes offers a proven, step-by-step strategy for coming to mutually acceptable agreements in every sort of conflict. Thoroughly updated and revised, it offers readers a straight- forward, universally applicable method for negotiating personal and professional disputes without getting angry-or getting taken.

My main argument is that whilst the tools of principled negotiation havelimitations when negotiating with Donald Trump (or someonelike him), theynevertheless help us avoid entering into an agreement that is not beneficial tous. Furthermore, as most people wouldlikely 'lose' a negotiation with DonaldTrump if it is based on positional bargaining, including a contest of will, thetools ofprincipled negotiation are still preferable to positional bargaining.In addition, the principled negotiation tools arguably remainexcellentanalytical tools to help us understand a particular negotiation with DonaldTrump, including what interests are at stakeetc.

Many people probably tend to think that when negotiating, you either playhard and 'win' or play soft and 'lose'. However, negotiationis not always thatblack and white (or, soft or hard if you will). Both playing hard and playingsoft have their advantages and disadvantages.For instance, by playing hard andstubbornly bargain over your own position without making any concessions you may'win' in the sensethat you may reach an agreement with your counterpart whichfavors your position. However, at the same time there is a risk thatyourbehavior leads to the result that your counterpart will be hesitant enteringinto future agreements with you and/or you endangerthe ongoing relationshipbetween you and yourcounterpart.[10] Nevertheless,playing soft is not necessarily a good approach either. For instance, by playingsoft you may save the relationshipwith your counterpart and reach an agreement,but the agreement may not be wise for you (or your counterpart) if you have beentoofriendly and focused too much on the necessity of reaching an agreementinstead of satisfying yourinterests.[11] According toGetting to Yes, principled negotiationstrategy offers an alternative to positional bargaining where you do not have tosettle your mind on beingeither a hard or soft bargainer. Instead of bargainingover positions, principled negotiation strategy seeks to share and exploretheinterests that underlies negotiators' positions and find solutions that satisfythese interests.[12]

The third element of principled negotiation is to invent options for mutualgain. This means that instead of searching for the single'right' answer to thesubstantive problem and settle for the first agreement possibly satisfying this'right' solution, negotiatorsshould develop a number of different solutions tothe problem that satisfy both parties' interests before deciding on onesolution.[20] The rationale behindthis element is that negotiators make the wisest solutions when they areselected from a great number ofoptions.[21] Essentially,negotiators are advised to brainstorm (without judging) on all possiblesolutions that would satisfy their interestsbefore settling on one (or more)realistic solutions.[22]

That being said, I recognize that the above-mentioned examples do not providethe full picture of how Donald Trump negotiates andthat his negotiationstrategy may vary from negotiation to negotiation. For instance, his strategywhen negotiating a bilateral tradeagreement with Japan may differ from whennegotiating with Hillary Clinton during the election campaign. It is obviouslyalso relevantto keep in mind that the act of running for president in theUnited States may be extra disruptive as all candidates pursue the samegoal,but only one achieves it.[63]

I argue that whilst the tools have limitations when negotiating with DonaldTrump (or someone like him) they nevertheless help negotiatorsavoid enteringinto bad agreements, including agreements based on e.g. pressure from threats orphycological abuse.

When negotiating with someone who is more powerful than you (as Donald Trumpwill likely be), Getting to Yes states that it is key to carefullydevelop your BATNA. This means that you should not only briefly consider whatyour alternativeswould be; you should vigorously explore them to make the bestout of your assets.[64] Forinstance, if negotiating an agreement with Donald Trump, you should carefully(i) invent a list of actions you could take ifno agreement is reached (one suchaction could be that you could satisfy your interests by entering into anagreement with someoneelse), (ii) try to strengthen these actions (or,alternatives) by converting them into practical alternatives (e.g. you couldexploreif it is in fact possible to reach an agreement with someone else,including who it could be) and (iii) select the bestalternative.[65] The greater theBATNA, the easier it is for you to confidently break off a negotiation if it isnot beneficial to you (even whenyour counterpart is more powerful thanyou).[66]

In addition to carefully considering your own BATNA, Getting to Yesalso states that you should consider the other side's BATNA, including howyou may be able to (legitimately) worsen it (as addressedin Section 2.E above).For example, if you are negotiating a certain agreement with Donald Trump, hisBATNA could be to enter intoa similar agreement with someone else than you.Therefore, you could explore how to weaken his ability to enter into suchagreementwith someone else. If successful, and Donald Trump knows that it maybe difficult to enter into a similar agreement with someoneelse, he may be morewilling to enter into the agreement with you. However, if Donald Trump does notwork with BATNAs but ratherbottom line approaches (as addressed in SectionIII.E above) and is willing to do whatever it takes to achieve what he wants,thisstrategy may in reality not have any influence on the outcome of youragreement with him. Nevertheless, it may still be worth thetry.

Based on the above, the tools of principled negotiation are arguably helpfulwhen negotiating with Donald Trump (or someone like him).Particularly, thetools may help you avoid entering into an agreement that is not beneficial toyou (i.e. by considering your BATNA).Furthermore, the tools may help you avoidthat both you and your counterpart end up attacking each other and lockingyourselves intopositions (i.e. by using negotiation jujitsu). Finally, thetools may help you avoid making an agreement based on pressure or threats( insisting on using objective criteria).

I have found that whilst the tools of principled negotiation have limitationswhen negotiating with Donald Trump, they neverthelesshelp us avoid enteringinto an agreement that is not beneficial to us (i.e. by referring to our BATNA).Furthermore, as most peoplewould likely 'lose' a negotiation with Donald Trumpif it is based on positional bargaining, including a contest of will, the toolsof principled negotiation are still preferable to positional bargaining. Inaddition, the principled negotiation tools arguably remainexcellent analyticaltools to help us understand a particular negotiation with Donald Trump,including what interests are at stakeetc.

John McKee, a business coach and author, says that being armed with facts to counter what the other side in a negotiation might try to present or argue against is the key to getting what you want and communicating your position without appearing unreasonable. 041b061a72


Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...


bottom of page