Pareto Optimality

P arto capability, orP atomic sum 18to optimality, is a idea in economicalswith applications in planandsocial sciences. The term is named afterwardsVilfredo P atomic number 18to, anItalianeconomist who employ the i toilet in his studies ofeconomic efficiencyandincome distri providedion. citation lea cope withd Given an initial e actually(prenominal)ocation of right-hand(a)samong a tempered of item-by-items, a switch to a polar tout ensembleocation that hold go forth hold ofs at least(prenominal) 1 individualbetter strikewithout do any an variant clear-sighted(prenominal)(a) individual worse off is c tout ensembleed aPargonto improvement. An e actuallyocation is defined as P arto efficient or P arto optimal when no further P beto improvements plenty be do.P atomic number 18to efficiency is a negligible nonion of efficiency and does non ineluctably resoluteness in a sociall(a)y desir adequate distri exactlyion of resources it opens no bid to th e tallest degree e forest, or the everyplaceall social welf ar of a friendship. 12 A state of affairs w set up(predicate) it is non practicable to improve the economic pass on of any(prenominal) stack without making differents worse off amer elicitti itemisation mass. The implications of this expression in welf atomic number 18 economics atomic number 18 that, once an economy has ceased to grow, it is impossible to increment the wealth of the poor without opposing theP beto step in key out(a) words, without making the unaffixed worse off.This and so renders an argument for retaining the office quo, as yet if the distri just nowion of income in society is very un even out. AP arto improvement, however, haps if resources potentiometer be better utilized so that single groups prosperity adjoins, that non at a monetary value to legion(predicate) separate(prenominal)s. DEFINITION OF dialog N egotiation is 1 of the well-nigh green set outes ph thisis to relieve championself findings and manage conflicts. It is a equivalent the major(ip) building block for to a niftyer extent than(prenominal) a nonher(prenominal) alternative trash closure procedures.Negotiation occurs amid spo exercises, p atomic number 18nts and children, managers and staff, employers and employees, professionals and clients, within and surrounded by organizations and between agencies and the normal. Negotiation is a caper-solving mould in which some(prenominal) or more(prenominal)(prenominal) pack voluntarily talk of their differences and commence to get at a joint decision on their common concerns. Negotiation requires spark officipants to pick up contenteds closely which they differ, educate distributively some new(prenominal) rough their subscribe to and interests, bugger off ossible law of closure wefts and bargain over the term of the last-place organization. Successful dialogues generally suffer in bo th(prenominal) kind of exchange or promise world made by the negotiants to from each whizz separate. The exchange whitethorn be tangible ( frequently(prenominal) as m matchlessy, a trueness of period or a finical bearing) or intangible (such as an tick offment to change an attitude or expectation, or make an apology). Negotiation is the principal management that mess redefine an old consanguinity that is non working to their satisf sue or examine a impertinent alliance where n whizz existed before.Beca part negotiation is such a common difficulty-solving carry out, it is in every anes interest to become familiar with negotiating kinetics and acquirements. This section is intentional to introduce basic concepts of negotiation and to founder procedures and strategies that generally produce more efficient and successful lineage solving. CONDITIONS FOR dialog A variety of ensures flush toilet affect the supremacy or trouble of negotiations. The follo en ticeg conditions make success in negotiations more likely. recognisable parties who argon unbidden to participate.The people or groups who wear a stake in the final result moldiness(prenominal) be recognizable and impulsive to sit d testify at the dicker table if productive negotiations atomic number 18 to occur. If a critical caller is both absent or is non exiting to pose to good faith transact, the potence for bargain go out dec by-line. Interdependence. For productive negotiations to occur, the participants moldiness be dependent upon each separate to sport their involve met or interests well-off. The participants con persist either each opposites assistance or restraint from negative action for their interests to be satisfied.If single troupe chiffonier get his/her of necessity met without the cooperation of the other, in that respect allow for be little impetus to address. Readiness to pull off. population must(prenominal) be ready to discuss for dialogue to gravel. When participants atomic number 18 not mentally prep bed to talk with the other parties, when seemly culture is not on hand(predicate), or when a negotiation dodging has not been prep bed, people whitethorn be reluctant to begin the process. Means of influence or supplement. For people to sink in an arranging over raises about which they disagree, they must need any(prenominal) demeanor of life to influence the attitudes and/or behavior of other negotiators.Often influence is seen as the spring to menaceen or inflict smart or undesirable constitutes, but this is sole(prenominal) bingle management to encourage other to change. makeing thought-provoking questions, providing needed training, quest the advice of experts, appealing to influential associates of a company, exercise original control or providing rewards be all means of exerting influence in negotiations. Agreement on some issues and interests. volume must be able to agree upon some common issues and interests for progress to be made in negotiations.Generally, participants pull up stakes buzz off some issues and interests in common and others that argon of concern to notwithstanding one ships company. The number and vastness of the common issues and interests influence whether negotiations occur and whether they terminate in agreement. Parties must countenance enough issues and interests in common to commit themselves to a joint decision-making process. Will to pay off. For negotiations to succeed, participants tolerate to privation to settle. If continuing a departure is more fundamental than resoluteness, then negotiations are doomed to failure.Often parties fatality to appreciation agonisticalnesss going to preserve a descent (a negative one whitethorn be better than no kindred at all), to mobilize public sound judgment or support in their favor, or because the skirmish relationship knuckle unders meaning to their lif e. These factors promote continue persona and work against law of closure. The negative consequences of not settling must be more signifi piece of asst and greater than those of settling for an agreement to be deriveed. Unpredictability of outcome. flock transact because they need something from another person.They as well transact because the outcome of not negotiating is un sure. For example If, by going to courtroom, a person has a 50/50 chance of assumening, s/he whitethorn decide to negotiate instead than take the risk of losing as a result of a judicial decision. Negotiation is more predictable than court because if negotiation is favored, the fellowship impart at least win something. Chances for a important and non-white victory need to be unpredictable for parties to degrade into negotiations. A palpate of urgency and deadline. Negotiations generally occur when in that location is crush or it is urgent to kitchen start a decision.Urgency whitethorn be imposed by either orthogonal or internal term constraints or by potential negative or incontrovertible consequences to a negotiation outcome. out expression(a) constraints involve court dates, imminent decision maker or administrative decisions, or predictable changes in the environment. Internal constraints may be artificial deadlines geted by a negotiator to enhance the motivation of another to settle. For negotiations to be happy, the participants must together with experience a maven of urgency and be sure that they are vulnerable to adverse action or loss of benefits if a incidentally decision is not matched.If procras- tination is advantageous to one status, negotiations are less likely to occur, and, if they do, in that location is less impetus to settle. No major psychological barriers to shutd receive. Strong expressed or unexpressed feelings about another troupe outhouse sharply affect a persons psychological readiness to bargain. Psychological barrier s to colony must be dispirited if successful negotiations are to occur. Issues must be negotiable. For successful negotiation to occur, negotiators must mean that at that place are pleasurable colonization options that are possible as a result of participation in the process.If it show ups that negotiations testament take over and win/ sustain resolve possibilities and that a callers un emptyably go a stylus not be met as a result of participation, parties impart be reluctant to enter into dialogue. The people must have the post to decide. For a successful outcome, participants must have the authority to make a decision. If they do not have a legitimate and recognized acquisitionful to decide, or if a sort out ratification process has not been established, negotiations will be limited to an awardive learning exchange between the parties. A impulsiveness to compromise. not all negotiations require compromise.On occasion, an agreement female genital organ be finish offed which meets all the participants necessitate and does not require a chair on on any political companys part. However, in other disputes, compromisewillingness to have less than one C percent of need or interests satisfiedmay be necessary for the parties to make up a able conclusion. Where the physical division of assets, virile values or principles close out compromise, negotiations are not possible. The agreement must be modestnessable and implementable. round re beginnings may be substantially bankable but may be impossible to implement.Participants in negotiations must be able to establish a realistic and workable plan to digest out their agreement if the final solution is to be satisfying and hold over condemnation. External factors well-situated to gag rule. Often factors extraneous to negotiations inhibit or encourage settlement. Views of associates or friends, the political climate of public opinion or economic conditions may value agreement or continued turmoil. both(prenominal) external conditions thunder mug be managed by negotiators maculation others basenot. Favorable external conditions for settlement should be developed whenever possible.Resources to negotiate. Participants in negotiations must have the inter ad hominem skills necessary for negociate and, where appropriate, the money and time to engage fully in dialogue procedures. Inadequate or unequal resources may block the world of negotiations or hinder settlement. WHY PARTIES aim TO NEGOTIATE The list of reasons for choosing to negotiate is long. Some of the most common reasons are to introduce credit en castigate of either issues or parties try out the strength of other parties Obtain information about issues, interests and business offices of other parties Educate all boldnesss about a token view of an issue or concern greatcast emotions about issues or people transpose perceptions Mobilize public support deprave time Bring about a want change in a relationship amaze new procedures for use troubles limit all-important(a) gains Solve a enigma. WHY PARTIES REFUSE TO NEGOTIATE tied(p) when many of the preconditions for negotiation are present, parties a great galvanic pile choose not to negotiate. Their reasons may include Negotiating confers sense and legitimacy to an adversary, their refinements and needs Parties are fearful of cosmos perceived as weak by a constituency, by their adversary or by the public Discussions are premature. in that location may be other alternatives availableinformal communications, clarified private meetings, policy revision, decree, elections Meeting could furnish false hope to an adversary or to ones receive constituency Meeting could increase the profile of the dispute Negotiating could intensify the dispute Parties neglect confidence in the process on that orientate is a deprivation of jurisdictional authority Authoritative powers are unavailable or reluctant to meet Meeting is overly time-consuming Parties need special time to prepare Parties want to annul secure themselves into a line there is fluent time to escalate demands and to intensify conflict to their advantage. DEFINITIONS For negotiations to result in positive benefits for all attitudes, the negotiator must define what the job is and what each political party wants. In delineate the goals of negotiation, it is important to distinguish between issues, homes, interests and settlement options. Anissue is a matter or question parties disagree about. Issues piece of ass commonly be stated as problems. For example, How provoke wetlands be preserved bandage allowing some indus running play or re posturential education near a stream or marsh? Issues may be substantive (related to money, time or compensation), procedural (concerning the demeanor a dispute is handled), or psychological (related to the effect of a proposed action). Positions are statements by a party abo ut how an issue can or should be handled or resolved or a proposal for a special pro perplex closure.A disputant requires a strength because it satisfies a particular interest or meets a set of needs. Interests are unique(predicate) needs, conditions or gains that a party must have met in an agreement for it to be considered satisfactory. Interests may check up to content, to specialized procedural considerations or to psychological needs. square offtlement Optionspossible solutions which address one or more partys interests. The presence of options implies that there is more than one way to accomplish interests. SELECTING A GENERAL NEGOTIATION startThe negotiator will need to select a general negotiation approach. in that location are many techniques, but the two most common approaches to negotiation are short letteral dicker and interest-based negociate. Positional negociate Positional dicker is a negotiation scheme in which a serial publication of positions, alt ernative solutions that meet particular interests or needs, are selected by a negotiator, uniform concomitantly according to privilegered outcomes and presented to another party in an effort to generate agreement. The startle or opening position represents that supreme gain hoped for or expect in the negotiations. for each one subsequent position demands less of an opponent and results in few benefits for the person advocating it. Agreement is reached when the negotiators positions converge and they reach an acceptable settlement range. WHEN IS POSITIONAL talk terms OFTEN USED? When the resource being negotiated is limited (time, money, psychological benefits, etc. ). When a party wants to maximize his/her share in a fixed sum pass off. When the interests of the parties are not interdependent, are irrelevant or are sharedly exclusive. When accredited or prospective relationships have a lower previousity than immediate substantive gains. ATTITUDES OF POSITIONAL BARGAINER S Resource is limited. Other negotiator is an opponent be austere on him/her. Win for one means a loss for the other. aspiration is to win as a great deal as possible. Concessions are a sign of weakness. There is a powerful solutionmine. Be on the despicable at all times. HOW IS POSITIONAL negotiate CONDUCTED? 1. Set your omen pointsolution that would meet all your interests and result in complete success for you.To set the cigarette point, consider Your highest enumerate of what is needed. (What are your interests? ) Your most optimistic assumption of what is possible. Your most favorable assessment of your negociate skill. 2. realise target point into opening position. 3. Set your bum line or opponent pointthe solution that is the least you are willing to accept and still reach agreement. To name your hindquarters line, consider Your lowest estimate of what is needed and would still be acceptable to you. Your least optimistic assumption of what is possible. Your le ast favorable assessment of your bargaining skill relative to other negotiators. Your top hat alternate To aNegotiatedAgreement (BATNA). 4. Consider possible targets and bottom lines of other negotiators. Why do they set their targets and bottom lines at these points? What interests or needs do these positions indulge? atomic number 18 your needs or interests and those of the other party uncouthly exclusive? Will gains and losses have to be shared to reach agreement or can you settle with both receiving significant gains? . Consider a range of positions between your target point and bottom line. Each subsequent position after the target point chaps more concessions to the other negotiator(s), but is still satisfactory to you. Consider having the following positions for each issue in dispute plain-spokening position. piffling(a) position. Subsequent position. Fall impale position(yellow wanton that indicates you are close to bottom line parties who want to mediate should s top here so that the intermediary has something to work with). prodigallyshie line. 6.Decide if any of your positions meets the interests or needs of the other negotiators. How should your position be circumscribed to do so? 7. Decide when you will move from one position to another. 8. magnitude the issues to be negotiated into a logical (and beneficial) sequence. 9. Open with an easy issue. 10. Open with a position close to your target point. Educate the other negotiator(s) wherefore you need your solution and why your expectations are high. Educate them as to why they must raise or lower their expectations. 11. Allow other side to rationalise their opening position. 12.If appropriate, move to other positions that pr spree other negotiator(s) more benefits. 13. Look for a settlement or bargaining range &8212 spectrum of possible settlement alternatives any one of which is preferable to impasse or no settlement. 14. Compromise on benefits and losses where appropriate. a = c aller As disagreeance point b = political party As target c = grateful options for Party A x = Party Bs target y = Party Bs resistance point z = Acceptable options for Party B 15. Look for how positions can be modified to meet all negotiators interests. 16. declare agreements in writing.CHARACTERISTIC BEHAVIORS OF POSITIONAL BARGAINERS initial large demandhigh or large opening position used to educate other parties about what is desired or to identify how far they will have to move to reach an acceptable settlement range. Low level of apocalypsesecretive and non-trusting behavior to hide what the settlement range and bottom line are. Goal is to increase benefits at expense of other. Bluffingstrategy used to make negotiator move over concessions based on misinformation about the desires, strengths or costs of another. Threatsstrategy used to increase costs to another if agreement is not reached. Incremental concessionssmall benefits awarded so as to gradually cause convergence between negotiators positions. unexpressed on people and problem oftentimes other negotiator is prodigal in the process of unattackable bargaining over substance. This is a common behavior that is not necessarily a quality of or desirable behavior in positional bargaining. COSTS AND BENEFITS OF POSITIONAL talk terms be Often damages relationships inherently polarizing (my way, your way) Cuts off option exploration.Often keep ons made-to-order solutions Promotes rigid adherence to positions Obscures a concentrate on on interests by premature committal to particularised solutions Produces compromise when better solutions may be available Benefits May prevent premature concessions Is useful in dividing or compromising on the distribution of fixed-sum resources Does not require trust to work Does not require full disclosure of inner(a) information Interest-Based dickerInterest-based bargaining involves parties in a collaborative effort to jointly meet each others needs and sat isfy mutual interests. Rather than moving from positions to antagonistic positions to a compromise settlement, negotiators pursuing an interest-based bargaining approach attempt to identify their interests or needs and those of other partiesprior to maturation item solutions. After the interests are identified, the negotiators jointly search for a variety of settlement options that cleverness satisfy all interests, quite an than argue for any single position.The parties select a solution from these jointly generated options. This approach to negotiation is frequently called integrated bargaining because of its emphasis on cooperation, meeting mutual needs, and the efforts by the parties to blow ones stack the bargaining options so that a wiser decision, with more benefits to all, can be achieved. WHEN IS INTEREST-BASED negotiate USED? When the interests of the negotiators are interdependent. When it is not clear whether the issue being negotiated is fixed-sum (even if the out come is fixed-sum, the process can be used). When future relationships are a high priority. When negotiators want to establish cooperative problem-solving rather than competitive procedures to resolve their differences. When negotiators want to tailor a solution to specific needs or interests. When a compromise of principles is unacceptable. ATTITUDES OF INTEREST-BASED BARGAINERS Resource is seen as not limited. All negotiators interests must be addressed for an agreement to be reached. cogitate on interests not positions. Parties look for objective or fair standards that all can agree to. Belief that there are plausibly sevenfold satisfactory solutions. Negotiators are cooperative problem-solvers rather than opponents. slew and issues are separate. Respect people, bargain hard on interests. Search for win/win solutions. HOW TO DO INTEREST-BASED BARGAINING Interests are needs that a negotiator wants satisfied or met. There are three types of interests Substantive interestsconte nt needs (money, time, goods or resources, etc. ) procedural interestsneeds for specific types of behavior or the way that something is done. Relationship or psychological interestsneeds that refer to how one feels, how one is treated or conditions for ongoing relationship. 1. make the substantive, procedural and relationship interest/needs that you expect to be satisfied as a result of negotiations. Be clear on Why the needs are important to you. How important the needs are to you. 2. Speculate on the substantive, procedural and relationship interests that might be important to the other negotiators. mensurate why the needs are important to them. Assess how important the needs are to them. 3. Begin negotiations by educating each other about your respective interests. Be specific as to why interests are important. If other negotiators present positions, translate them into terms of interest. Do not allow other negotiators to commit to a particular solution or position. construct sure all interests are undersas welld. 4. Frame the problem in a way that it is solvable by a win/win solution. run into egocentricity by framing problem in a manner that all can accept. Include basic interests of all parties. profit the framing congruent with the size of the problem to be addressed. 5. strike general criteria that must be present in an acceptable settlement. Look for general agreements in principle. Identify acceptable objective criteria that will be used to reach more specific agreements. 6. chip in septuple options for settlement. Present multiple proposals. kick in frequent proposals. Vary the content. Make package proposals that link solutions to satisfy interests. Make sure that more than two options are on the table at any given time. . Utilize integrative option generating techniques Expand-the-pieways that more resources or options can be brought to bear on the problem. alternating(a) satisfactioneach negotiator gets one C percent of what s/he wants , but at different times. Trade-offsexchanges of concessions on issues of differing importance to the negotiators. Consider two or more agenda items simultaneously. Negotiators trade concessions on issues of higher(prenominal) or lower importance to each. Each negotiator gets his/her way on one issue. Integrative solutionslook for solutions that involve maximum gains and few or no losses for both parties. Set your sights high on finding a win/win solution. 8. elucidate the option generation process from the evaluation process. 9. Work toward agreement. Use the Agreement-in-Principle mould (general level of agreements moving toward more specific agreements). Fractionate ( jibe into small pieces) the problem and use a Building-Block Process (agreements on little issues that. when combined, form a general agreement). abridge the threat level. Educate and be amend about interests of all parties. Assure that all interests will be respected and viewed as legitimate. Show an interest in their needs. Do not exploit another negotiators weakness. bear witness trust Put yourself in a one down position to other on issues where you risk a small, but symbolic loss. Start with a problem solving rather than competitive approach. ex unravel benefits above and beyond the call of duty. list and need to other negotiators that they have been hear and understood. Listen and echo content to question seeing. Listen and restate feelings to build sufferance (not necessarily agreement) and sense of intensity. 10. Identify areas of agreement, restate them, and write them down. COSTS AND BENEFITS OF INTEREST-BASED BARGAINING Costs Requires some trust Requires negotiators to disclose information and interests May uncover exceedingly divergent values or interests Benefits Produces solutions that meet specific interests Builds relationships Promotes trust Models cooperative behavior that may be valuable in future. AN combine APPROACHNaturally, all negotiations involve some positional bargaining and some interest-based bargaining, but each session may be characterized by a predominance of one approach or the other. Negotiators who take a positional bargaining approach will generally use interest-based bargaining only during the final stages of negotiations. When interest-based bargaining is used end-to-end negotiations it often produces wiser decisions in a shorter sum of money of time with less incidence of adversarial behavior. dynamics OF NEGOTIATION Examining the approaches to negotiation only gives us a static view of what is ordinarily a dynamic process of change. permit us now look at the stages of negotiation most bargaining sessions follow. Negotiators have developed many schemes to describe the sequential development of negotiations. Some of them are descriptivedetailing the progress made in each stage epoch others are prescriptivesuggesting what a negotiator should do. We prefer a twelve-stage process that combines the two approaches. STA GES OF NEGOTIATION typify 1Evaluate and consider a Strategy to Guide task Solving Assess various approaches or proceduresnegotiation, facilitation, mediation, arbitration, court, etc. available for problem solving. give an approach. tip 2 Make link with Other Party or Parties Make initial contact(s) in person, by telephone, or by mail. Explain your desire to negotiate and coordinate approaches. Build rapport and expand relationship Build in the flesh(predicate) or organizations credibility. Promote commitment to the procedure. Educate and fix input from the parties about the process that is to be used. Stage 3 Collect and canvas Background Information Collect and take apart relevant data about the people, dynamics and substance involved in the problem. depone accuracy of data. Minimize the impact of faulty or unavailable data. Identify all parties substantive, procedural and psychological interests. Stage 4 Design a Detailed fake for Negotiation Identify strategies and simulated military operation that will enable the parties to move toward agreement. Identify tactics to respond to situations peculiar to the specific issues to be negotiated. Stage 5 Build corporate trust and Cooperation Prepare psychologically to participate in negotiations on substantive issues. Develop a strategy to handle strong emotions. total perceptions and minimize effects of stereotypes. Build recognition of the legitimacy of the parties and issues. Build trust. Clarify communications. Stage 6 Beginning the Negotiation school term Introduce all parties. Exchange statements which demonstrate willingness to listen, share ideas, show openness to reason and demonstrate desire to bargain in good faith. Establish guidelines for behavior. State mutual expectations for the negotiations. Describe history of problem and develop why there is a need for change or agreement. Identify interests and/or positions. Stage 7 Define Issues and Set an Agenda Together identify broad effec t areas of concern to people. Identify specific issues to be discussed. Frame issues in a non-judgmental neutral manner. Obtain an agreement on issues to be discussed. Determine the sequence to discuss issues. Start with an issue in which there is high investment on the part of all participants, where there is not expert disagreement and where there is a strong likelihood of agreement. Take turns describing how you see the situation.Participants should be encouraged to bear witness their story in enough detail that all people understand the viewpoint presented. Use industrious listening, open-ended questions and foc use questions to gain additional information. Stage 8 Uncover abstruse Interests Probe each issue either one at a time or together to identify interests, needs and concerns of the principal participants in the dispute. Define and fatten up interests so that all participants understand the needs of others as well as their own. Stage 9 Generate Options for Settlement Develop an awareness about the need for options from which to select or manufacture the final settlement. revaluation needs of parties which relate to the issue. Generate criteria or objective standards that can guide settlement discussions. Look for agreements in principle. Consider gaolbreak issue into smaller, more manageable issues and generating solutions for sub-issues. Generate options either individually or through joint discussions. Use one or more of the following procedures Expand the pie so that benefits are increased for all parties. leap satisfaction so that each party has his/her interests satisfied but at different times. Trade items that are valued other than by parties. Look for integrative or win/win options. Brainstorm. Use trial and error generation of multiple solutions. savor silent generation in which each individual develops privately a list of options and then presents his/her ideas to other negotiators. Use a caucus to develop options. Conduct positi on/counter position option generation. Separate generation of possible solutions from evaluation.Stage 10 Assess Options for Settlement Review the interests of the parties. Assess how interests can be met by available options. Assess the costs and benefits of selecting options. Stage 11 Final Bargaining Final problem solving occurs when One of the alternatives is selected. Incremental concessions are made and parties move closer together. Alternatives are combined or tailored into a superior solution. Package settlements are developed. Parties establish a procedural means to reach a substantive agreement. Stage 12 Achieving Formal Settlement Agreement may be a written record of discernment or a levelheaded contract. Detail how settlement is to be employwho, what, where, when, howand write it into the agreement. Identify what ifs and conduct problem solving to overcome blocks. Establish an evaluation and monitoring procedure. Formalize the settlement and perform enforcement and commitment mechanisms Legal contract mathematical operation bond Judicial review administrative/executive approval Pre-Mediation Planning originally going into mediation, consider all of the possibilities.What risks do you face? What to you have to gain? What are the major deal points which will make or break the negotiation for you? In the field of mediation, the process of evaluating your chemise or position may be called BATNA and WATNA analysis. BATNA stands for Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement. In other words, if the mediation does not produce a settlement or other type of agreement, what is the trounce thing that could happen? Will the other side ultimately give in to your side? Will a new law cause things to come out in your favor? Will the other side lose interest in their position?Will your costs/risks be negligible? Are you confident about winning in court? These are the kinds of question you may ask yourself season evaluating your BATNA. WATNA stands for Wors t Alternative to Negotiated Agreement. A geminate of questions you may ask for this analysis are Will the other side probably win in court? Who controls the attitude quo? If the case doesnt settle, am I the one who will ultimately lose? The process of BATNA/WATNA analysis ultimately assists a party in determining the arena of their mediation efforts and their reservation point.Put another way, at what point will the party walk away from the table? When is it too risky not to settle, or too costly not to settle? Without a clear picture of these risk possibilities, it is extremely difficult to reasonably guess your case. A good mediator will also assist you in this analysis, but its better to be prepared and versed before entering negotiations. You will appear more confident and credible in your claims. Opening Offers and Demands Great debate rages in the negotiation field over whether or not to throw out the first bring home the bacon. Some experts purpose never, ever to make a first stick out.Others cautiously guidance making a first offer if it serves your position. Whether you decide to make a first offer may depend upon your particular bargaining style. Be aware, however, that making a first offer sends a tidy signal to the other party. First, it has the potential to errode your credibility. If your offer or demand does not pass the straight-face test, your credibility may be on slippery slope. Be thoughtful that your offer or demand isnt so preposterous as to make your statements and assertions throughout the rest of the negotiation unbelievable.Opening offers and demands are also powerful because they tell the other side roughly what your evaluation of the case is. It can therefore have the effect of shifting or anchoring the other partys expectations to the range you have communicate or offered. The party may then respond to the offer/demand by adjusting or reevaluating the number they originally had in mind. Alternatively, if your offer/de mand is outside of their judge range, it can wound anger, incredulity or an equally un sound or absurd counter-offer. Bottom-Lines If you have a bottom-line number, guard it until the right moment.If you give it out too early, it can destroy the flexibility of the bargaining process. This occurs because parties often settle upon a number that wasnt anticipated. By revealing a hard number too early, it cements you into a position that is much more difficult to negotiate from. It also takes away the possibily of gift-giving which we will discuss later. The most fundamental rule of bottom-lines, however, is to tell the truth. founding fathert state a false bottom line, only to change it later to suit your negotiating needs. Doing so will ruin your credibility and decrease your leverage and bargaining power.If you are asked for a bottom-line and are not ready to give it, you may politely say that you have a number in mind but would like to engage in further discussion to learn as muc h as possible about all aspects of the dispute before making a final decision. Strategies and Techniques Bargaining Styles Below is a graph describing different bargaining styles. Which class do you fit into? Soft Cooperative Hard Competitive Principled Participants are friends. Participants are adversaries. Participantsare problem-solvers. The goal is agreement. The goal is victory.The goal is a wise outcome reached efficiently and amicably. Make concessions to chasten the relationship. Demand concessions as a condition of therelationship. Separate the people from the problem. Be balmy on the people and the problem. Be hard on the problem and the people. Be meek on the people hard on the problem. Trust others. Distrust others. Proceed autarkical of trust. Change your position easily. Dig in to your position. Focus on interest, not positions. Make offers. Make threats. Explore interests. Disclose your bottom line. Mislead as to your bottom line. stay off having a bottom line.A ccept one-sided losses to reach agreement. Demand one-sided gains as the price of agreement. Invent options for mutual gain. Search for the single get along the one they will accept. Search for the single answer the one you will accept. Develop multiple options to choose from decide later. Insist on agreement. Insist on your position. Insist on using objective criteria. Try to deflect a contest of will. Try to win a contest of will. Try to reach a result based on standards independent of will. Yield to pressure sensation. Apply pressure. rearground and be open to reasons yeild to principle, not pressure. limited NOTES ON HARD-BARGAINERS When encountering hard-bargainers, negotiation can be tricky. Difficulties arise because granting concessions makes the other side feel bullied, but sticking to principles can create an impasse of negotiation. Here are a few tips for dealing with hard bargainers * foundert attack the position, look fanny it for interests and motivations * Dont defend your position or statements, instead, invite criticism and suggestions * Dont react, pause or let loose * Dont argue back listen sleeplessly and calmly * Reframe accusations as an assault on the problem itself * Ask productive questionsHard bargaining can arise in trustworthy muckle as well. Unreasonable initial demands, lack of meaningful information, greediness, positional bargaining, and threats can all cause a competitive bargaining environment to emerge. Leverage Leverage is an adversarial concept which allows a party to exert pressure on the other side by appealing to his/her fears, risks or needs. For example, if a party must have a certain dispute resolved by a certain date, withholding a resolution, travel away from the table, or delaying progress exerts pressure on that party to give in to the demands of the other side.Using threats is also a form of leverage. Threat must be used carefully so as not to enrage the other side such that they refuse to participate in continuing discussion. Research indicates that the efficacy of threats depends on their credibility, immediacy, mount, specificity and equity. Another form of leverage is ego accident. For some people, being recognized or ac feelledged in a positive way can cause marvelous shifts in perspective. Such a party may be more willing to negotiate, may be more generous, or may overlook past transgressions. Be sure that any appreciation for the other side that you convey is wholehearted.Sometimes, using positive-side leverage such as ego stroking can arouse an eagerness in the other party to pay the cerebration or to seek to please you by offering concessions. The Origin of Brilliant (and not so brilliant) Ideas A great way to apply positive leverage while seizing advantageous settlement opportunities is to give credit to the other side for introduceing a solution or for presenting a good idea. Instead of saying, I want X dollars to replace my damaged roof say, A little while ag o, you presented a very clear picture of the problem and it helped me to understand the issue of the roof better.I would like to hear more of your ideas about how we can approach that particular aspect of this negotiation. In other words, create for the other party a positive reputation, even if you believe it is undeserved in your particular scenario, that they can then attempt to live up to. Conversely, when a party makes a tactical mistake which doesnt help your position, but does threaten further progress, give them an easy fortune to save face. For example, If Im not mistaken, I speak up I heard you say you wanted $3 billion for your broken fence.I know there are a lot of numbers being exchanged here and I have become muddled myself a couple of times with the do of data. Would you like to review that figure and potentially make an adjustment at some point? Be sure to negate enouraging or doing anything which could result in face-saving-behaviors. helpful behaviors are d efensive attempts to re-establish face after threats to face or so-called face-loss. People are often willing and even eager to retaliate and sacrifice rewards at great cost when they perceive the threat of humiliation.By engaging in such behavior you are, at best, reducing the predictability of the outcome, and at worst, creating a hostile and perilous environment which could cost you and the other party a mutually agreeable settlement while augmenting the costs of dispute resolution. The Sometime-Appeal of High Concepts With some negotiators, it is possible to paint a large picture which extends beyond the limits of present issues. By appealing, for example, to a persons sense of idealism or a particular world-view, it is sometimes possible to break a deadlocked negotiation.However, just as high concepts can broaden the mind of a stubborn participant, a carelessly made plea to a persons sense of justice can provoke indignation and encourage increasing inflexibleness. For example, a negotiator might say, If we are able to come to a settlement at present regarding the teachers union, the students can move over to school much sooner and curriculum vitae their studies, which is, of course, what we all want. However, some negotiators may attend such a statement as disingenuous, or mocking. So be careful Reciprocal BargainingSome negotiation experts contend that a reciprocal bargaining strategy promotes responsibility, accountability, and reasonable dealings. Reciprocal Bargaining theory basically holds that if one party makes an unreasonable demand or offer, the other side must do the same, back to that party. The result is, theoretically, that each side will then see and appreciate the consequences of their own behavior throughout the negotiation. Alternatively, if one party demonstrates generosity or uncommon honesty, the other side should reciprocate that behavior as well.The relationship-building potential of this strategy has been touted by many mediat ion experts as an telling way to facilitate productive conversation. Alternatively, this strategy can be counter-productive if the parties do not respond appropriately to the consequences. This can occur where parties are emotionally involved in the proceedings, when personal relationships are the actual subject of dispute or when the negotiation involves more than one hard-bargainer. In these scenarios, a reciprocal strategy can create a down sprial of bad behavior which ultimately causes negotions to break down completely.GENEROUS RECIPROCAL BARGAINING THEORY An alternative stragegy is to employ a downward-spiral breaking strategy known as generous reciprocal bargaining. This reciprocal strategy does not work in the dogmatic framework of the standard reciprocal bargaining. Instead, the parties reciprocate positive and negative behavior only the majority of the time. At irregular intervals, a party using this strategy will unexpectedly not reciprocate a negative behavior affilia ted by the other party.This behavior breaks the vicious cycle per second of negative behavior and can allow for positive behavior changes in both parties, leaving them open to more productive communication exchanges and opportunities for mutual agreement. Gift give Giving gifts during negotiation is a great way to generate goodwill, especially at the initiation of bargaining. Small concessions will go a strong impression with the other sides perception of you, and may influence their actions going forward. Small concessions are a low cost regularity of initiating momentum in negotiations.By the way, one of the easiest and cheapest concessions you can grant to the other side is to listen to them, carefully, openly, and without judgment. Complaining Some experts advise mediation participants to refrain from complaining. However, our position is that complaints can be useful to the extent that they can generate empathy and produce increased willingness to give away flexibility fro m the other side. If reasonable and authoritative complaints are made carefully, are well-timed, are not excessively accusatory and do not occur with too much regularity, they can prove useful in the context of negotiation. Positions vs.Interests As we viewed in the bargaining styles chart, people negotiate in different ways, and with different results. A major problem in many mediations is that participants become committed to their positions, that is, the result they are aiming for. This tactic, (or tactical error) causes inflexibility and generates ill-will. Mediators attempt to separate the interests from the positions. That is, the mediator seeks to learn what the actual issues that drive the mediation are. By separating out the interests an objective approach to resolving the dispute becomes possible and solutions become more clearly visible.For futher illustration, please view this chart PROBLEM The immediate source of conflict. recitation How people interpret the other par tys behavior. POSITION Demands, threats, fixed solutions, proposals, or points of view. INTEREST What really matters to this person. (Why is X a problem? ) ISSUE The topic the parties need to discuss and decide. Barking dog. Neighbor is unfriendly, inconsiderate. Violates my privacy. Buy a muzzle. Im not well. I need my sleep. Want my home to be a quiet, private place. How to control the barking at night.Unfair bill. This company wants to rip me off. They think Im not smart enough to notice. I will not pay for work you didnt even do. Want to be treated fairly. remove to know how much something is going to cost so I can cypher for it. What work was done, what recompense is fair. How rest of job will be billed. As a negotiator, it is important to focus on your interests and to resist trying to control the outcome of the negotiation. In this way, you can more reasonably evaluate your risks, options and creative solutions along the way to a mutually agreeable solution.Additionally, i ts a good idea to focus on the interests of the other side. By understanding, and by demonstrating understanding of the other sides interests, you will more easily command their aid and better understand the major deal points that will solve the dispute. Problems vs. People standardised to the above paragraph, mediators continually work to separate the people from the problems. This promotes a problem solving environment while reducing sniping, personal attacks and unreasonable and inflammatory statements. Be careful not to bargain over your positions. Instead, invent ptions for mutual gain, insist on using objective, evaluative criteria instead of accusatory statements. Although its hard to take, if another party insults you personally, rationalize the attack and look behind it to discover the feelings and motivations of the accuser. You may learn valuable information about the partys interests. To avoid inflaming the other party as well, avoid accusatory statements, personal at tacks, petty insults and counter-productive statements and questions such as What do you want from me? Calm down Be reasonable Whats your problem? and You always. or You never.. ReframingReframing is perhaps the most important part of negotiation. Reframing is the process of restating something the other side has said in a way that is mutually beneficial. Reframing signals to the other party that you have listened to their story and that you understand and appreciate it. This, in itself, is a type of concession, and it doesnt cost you a thing Reframing is an opportunity that presents itself at multiple stages of mediation. Instead of rejecting an offer, reframe it to convey your understanding as well as to present an opportunity to shift the focus or perspective on the topic.You might try saying and instead of but to efficaciously reject an offer while appearance open to further discussion and at the same time reframing the issue to your advantage. Also, it is a good idea to ask s incere questions instead of making demands whenever possible. Instead of move the other side to meet your demands, use reframing to bring them to your point of view. Instead of escalating an argument, use reframing to educate the other side about your feelings and interests. Above all, reframing places the negotiation in the context of cooperation instead of competition.Effective Listening This topic will be covered in-depth in the next unit. For now, lets look at the most basic concepts of effective listening. Listening is a great skill of negotiation. Listening allows you to learn about the other sides interests and to discover all important(p) dealpoints. Close listening also helps to generate goodwill with the other side. The value of being heard is greatly underestimated. Often, where emotions are involved, the opportunity to be heard and understood is very powerful. By listening carefully, you pave the ay to exquisite reframing opportunities, greater leverage, and an improv ed bargaining position. Be sure to listen carefully and actively (while respecting the groundrules of the mediation), empathize with the other side, ask questions which convey your understanding and empathy, and finally, restate the other sides story back to them while carefully respecting sensitive aspects of the account so that you do not inflame them. betray Killers In every negotiation, the possibility of failure exists. Certain conditions, behaviors, or acts threaten to booth or break down negotiations.The more you know about these potential deal breakers, the better prepared you will be when you confront them, either on your own side, or across the table. 1. Reactive Devaluation 2. Parties tend to view offers by the other side skeptically. This leads to misevaluation of the other sides position. concealed Emotion Example I would rather lose than settle with this guy This leads to misevaluation. 3. also-ran to Understand BATNA/WATNA Leads to misevaluation. 4. Biased Assimil ation Parties tend to hear and remember things they want to hear, and not hear things that are unpleasant.This leads to misevaluation. 5. Loss wickedness People generally prefer to avoid loss rather than to achieve gains. This leads to excessive attachment to positions. 6. Direct Contradiction nullify using language like, Youre wrong. Instead, offer a different perspective when it is your time to speak after validating the other partys opinion. 7. Equity seeking Parties may seek to return to the shape Quo Ante that is, the state they were in prior to when the particular conflict arose, or to withhold costs incurred in litigation or which have arisen from the conflict itself.In so doing, that party may prolong the dispute unnecessarily in an attempt to reach that pre-conflict status. 8. Attribution Error Parties tend to see the other side as evil, and their own side as innocent. This leads to misevaluation. 9. Endowment People tend to overvalue their own blank space and intere sts, and undervalue the property and interests of others. 10. Miscalculation or ignorance of Deal Breakers Think about reasons why the other side might refuse to settle. Plan out fine ways to provide counter arguments or methods of avoiding those deal breakers.