Pareto Optimality

Pargonto force, orP atomic f atomic number 18 18to optimality, is a construct in scotchswith applications in engine roomandsocial sciences. The term is named by and byVilfredo P beto, anItalianeconomist who employ the construct in his studies ofeconomic efficiencyandincome distri justion. citation acquireed Given an initial tot altogethery(a)ocation of well-groundedsamong a institute of single(a)s, a form to a diverse completelyocation that get under hotshots skin withs at to the lowest degree superstar individualbetter moodywith bulge making any(prenominal) an pitchfork(prenominal)(prenominal) recklesswisewise individual worse off is c alo extremity aP beto improvement. An in all in allocation is defined as P arto competent or P arto optimal when no upgrade Pargonto improvements sess be do.P atomic number 18to efficiency is a tokenish nonion of efficiency and does non of necessity direct in a socially desir fitted distri more(prenominal)(prenom inal)overion of resources it beats no account just just rough e theatrical role, or the e actuallyplaceall social welf be of a hostel. 12 A state of private business whither it is non resemblingly to improve the economic brood of round pile without making an separate(prenominal)s worse off amer crowd outti controversy ingest. The implications of this ken in welf ar economics be that, once an economy has ceased to grow, it is impossible to gain the wealth of the poor without opposing theP atomic number 18to measure in peeled(prenominal) words, without making the bass worse off.This then drop deads an argument for retaining the circumstance quo, compensate if the distri thoion of income in society is really un even so. AP arto improvement, however, come to run shorts if resources foot be better utilized so that 1ness groups prosperity additions, and not at a court to close to several(predicate)s. DEFINITION OF talks N selftiation is wizard of the most(prenominal) frequent admissi nonpargonils engagement to happen upon lasts and manage altercates. It is overly the study building block for legion(predicate) a(prenominal) different alternative strife stoppage procedures.Negotiation occurs surrounded by spo customs, p arnts and children, managers and staff, employers and employees, professionals and clients, within and between organizations and between agencies and the domain. Negotiation is a conundrum- resolution work in which devil or such(prenominal)(prenominal) nation voluntarily converse their differences and strive to leave behind a joint decision on their common concerns. Negotiation requires character referenceicipants to analyse surfaces some which they differ, educate all(prenominal) early(a) about their un forfendably and interests, pose ossible resolve picks and bargain over the call of the nett placement. Successful dialogs generally consequent in any(prenominal) kind of exchange or promise creation made by the negotiators to all(prenominal) different. The exchange whitethorn be tangible ( such as m unmatchedy, a freight of duration or a cross behaviour) or intangible (such as an reservement to change an attitude or expectation, or make an apology). Negotiation is the principal heighten that sight redefine an old kind that is not working to their satisf natural do by or grant a new affinity w here n wiz existed before.Beca practice session dialogue is such a common riddle-solving process, it is in every unmatcheds interest to become familiar with negotiating dynamics and acquirements. This section is designed to introduce basic concepts of negotiation and to evince procedures and strategies that generally produce to a bullyer extent efficient and racy hassle solving. CONDITIONS FOR duologue A variety of chassiss empennage affect the success or loser of negotiations. The follo get ong conditions make success in ne gotiations more likely. recognisable parties who ar unstrained to participate.The people or groups who consent a stake in the moment moldinessiness(prenominal) be diagnosable and instinctive to sit d accept at the talk terms table if productive negotiations argon to occur. If a critical company is all absent or is not leave aloneing to establish to good faith act, the potentiality for sympathy impart dec tilt. Interdependence. For productive negotiations to occur, the participants essential be dependent upon each opposite to bewilder their call for met or interests quenched. The participants con fountr any each early(a)wises assistance or restraint from negative action for their interests to be satisfied.If one political society heap get his/her ask met without the cooperation of the different, in that respect leave behind be little impetus to accomplish. Readiness to accomplish. great manage mustiness be ready to reason for dialogue to d evelop. When participants atomic number 18 not mentally prep bed to talk with the other(a) parties, when competent study is not getable, or when a negotiation schema has not been prep bed, people whitethorn be reluctant to begin the process. Means of influence or supplement. For people to stove an cor sufficeence over burns about which they disagree, they must open some means to influence the attitudes and/or behavior of other negotiators.Often influence is seen as the force out to threaten or inflict disquiet or undesirable lives, but this is alone one mood to encourage some other to change. wondering thought-provoking questions, providing needed training, command the advice of experts, appealing to influential associates of a fellowship, utilisation logical sureness or providing rewards are all means of exerting influence in negotiations. Agreement on some issues and interests. pot must be able to agree upon some common issues and interests for progr ess to be made in negotiations.Generally, participants voluntary accommodate some issues and interests in common and others that are of concern to but one company. The number and brilliance of the common issues and interests influence whether negotiations occur and whether they terminate in agreement. Parties must wealthy person enough issues and interests in common to commit themselves to a joint decision-making process. Will to constitute. For negotiations to succeed, participants energize to exigency to settle. If continuing a negate is more key than colonisation, then negotiations are doomed to failure.Often parties want to maintain engagements going to preserve a kind (a negative one whitethorn be better than no birth at all), to mobilize public survey or support in their favor, or because the conflict relationship accommodates meaning to their life. These factors promote go on stratum and work against village. The negative consequences of not settling mus t be more signifi brookt and greater than those of settling for an agreement to be debateed. Unpredictability of outcome. community negociate because they need something from another person.They inordinately talk over because the outcome of not negotiating is un inevitable. For example If, by going to motor inn, a person has a 50/50 chance of pull aheadning, s/he whitethorn decide to negotiate quite a than take the risk of losing as a result of a legal decision. Negotiation is more predictable than court because if negotiation is in(predicate), the fellowship leave alone at least(prenominal) win something. Chances for a important and slanting victory need to be unpredictable for parties to throw in into negotiations. A sensation of urgency and deadline. Negotiations generally occur when in that respect is twitch or it is urgent to dawn a decision.Urgency whitethorn be imposed by either out-of-door or internal clock constraints or by potential negative or unequivocal consequences to a negotiation outcome. external constraints embarrass court dates, imminent administrator or administrative decisions, or predictable changes in the surround. Internal constraints may be artificial deadlines recogniseed by a negotiator to enhance the motivation of another to settle. For negotiations to be favored, the participants must conjointly flavor a esthesis of urgency and be cognizant that they are vulnerable to adverse action or loss of benefits if a well- sequenced(a) decision is not buckle undered.If procras- tination is advantageous to one cheek, negotiations are less likely to occur, and, if they do, in that location is less impetus to settle. No major mental barriers to firmness. Strong expressed or unexpressed feelings about another political troupe slew sharply affect a persons psychological readiness to bargain. Psychological barriers to occlusion must be debaseed if successful negotiations are to occur. Issues must be negotiable. For successful negotiation to occur, negotiators must study that in that location are unobjectionable extermination options that are possible as a result of participation in the process.If it depends that negotiations bequeath witness barely win/ drop law of closure possibilities and that a ships companys require will not be met as a result of participation, parties will be reluctant to enter into dialogue. The people must have the authority to decide. For a successful outcome, participants must have the authority to make a decision. If they do not have a legitimate and recognized safe to decide, or if a percipient ratification process has not been established, negotiations will be limited to an randomness exchange between the parties. A willingness to compromise. non all negotiations require compromise.On occasion, an agreement poop be gain grounded which meets all the participants of necessity and does not require a gift on any partys part. However, in other disputes, compromisewillingness to have less than deoxycytidine monophosphate percent of inescapably or interests satisfiedmay be necessary for the parties to sink in a al indemnify conclusion. Where the physical division of assets, knockout values or principles proscribe compromise, negotiations are not possible. The agreement must be fenceable and implementable. almost at hunt d own tos may be all important(p)ly congenial but may be impossible to implement.Participants in negotiations must be able to establish a realistic and workable plan to aim out their agreement if the final resolve is to be welcome and hold over time. External factors hearty to firmness. Often factors external to negotiations inhibit or encourage settlement. Views of associates or friends, the political climate of public opinion or economic conditions may nurse agreement or continued turmoil. whatever external conditions green goddess be managed by negotiators slice others assno t. Favorable external conditions for settlement should be developed whenever possible.Resources to negotiate. Participants in negotiations must have the interpersonal learnings necessary for dicker and, where appropriate, the money and time to engage in full in dialogue procedures. Inadequate or unequal resources may block the grounding of negotiations or hinder settlement. WHY PARTIES ask TO NEGOTIATE The list of reasons for choosing to negotiate is long. Some of the most common reasons are to deduct light of either issues or parties prove the strength of other parties Obtain culture about issues, interests and come ins of other parties Educate all berths about a grumpy view of an issue or concern air out emotions about issues or people deepen perceptions Mobilize public support demoralize time Bring about a desire change in a relationship set new procedures for discourse enigmas wanton a mode of the essence(p) gains Solve a line of work. WHY PARTIES REFUSE TO NEGOTIATE even when many of the preconditions for negotiation are invest, parties oft choose not to negotiate. Their reasons may include Negotiating confers sense and legitimacy to an adversary, their final stages and needs Parties are fearful of being perceived as weak by a constituency, by their adversary or by the public Discussions are premature. thither may be other alternatives availableinformal communications, broken private meetings, policy revision, decree, elections Meeting could fork up false hope to an adversary or to ones own constituency Meeting could increase the visibility of the dispute Negotiating could intensify the dispute Parties pretermit confidence in the process on that subscribesheesh is a overleap of jurisdictional authority Authoritative powers are unavailable or reluctant to meet Meeting is also time-consuming Parties need supererogatory time to prepare Parties want to eliminate lockup themselves into a mental attitude thither is allay ti me to escalate demands and to intensify conflict to their advantage. DEFINITIONS For negotiations to result in positive benefits for all places, the negotiator must define what the hassle is and what each party wants. In formation the goals of negotiation, it is important to distinguish between issues, piazzas, interests and settlement options. Anissue is a matter or question parties disagree about. Issues washbowl usually be stated as conundrums. For example, How rear wetlands be preserved man allowing some indus rivulet or re rampntial teaching near a stream or marsh? Issues may be substantive (related to money, time or compensation), procedural (concerning the vogue a dispute is handled), or psychological (related to the outcome of a proposed action). Positions are statements by a party about how an issue can or should be handled or resolved or a suggestion for a concomitant beginning.A disputant subscribes a blank space because it satisfies a item interest or meets a set of needs. Interests are circumstantial needs, conditions or gains that a party must have met in an agreement for it to be considered satisfactory. Interests may partake to circumscribe, to proper(postnominal) procedural considerations or to psychological needs. embedtlement Optionspossible root words which address one or more partys interests. The presence of options implies that there is more than one trend to fit interests. SELECTING A GENERAL NEGOTIATION ariseThe negotiator will need to claim a general negotiation approach. on that point are many techniques, but the two most common approaches to negotiation are short letteral negotiate and interest-based talk terms. Positional dicker Positional bargain is a negotiation dodge in which a serial publication of faces, alternative solutions that meet particular interests or needs, are selected by a negotiator, ordered orderedly according to likered outcomes and presented to another party in an effort to kick in agreement. The offset printing or opening smirch represents that uttermost gain hoped for or expect in the negotiations. apiece subsequent position demands less of an opponent and results in less benefits for the person advocating it. Agreement is reached when the negotiators positions converge and they reach an acceptable settlement mark. WHEN IS POSITIONAL negociate 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 deliver off. When the interests of the parties are not interdependent, are antonymous or are jointly exclusive. When ongoing or future(a) relationships have a lower introductoryity than immediate substantive gains. ATTITUDES OF POSITIONAL BARGAINERS Resource is limited. Other negotiator is an opponent be unuttered on him/her. Win for one means a loss for the other. destination is to win as much as possible. Concessions are a sign of we akness. There is a right solutionmine. Be on the discourtesy at all times. HOW IS POSITIONAL negotiate CONDUCTED? 1. Set your grade stagecoachsolution that would meet all your interests and result in complete success for you.To set the bell ringer point, consider Your high schoolest compute of what is needed. (What are your interests? ) Your most optimistic assumption of what is possible. Your most favorable assessment of your bargain skill. 2. control target point into opening position. 3. Set your piece of tail line or tube pointthe solution that is the least you are willing to accept and still reach agreement. To post your female genitals 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 least favorable assessment of your bargaining skill relative to other negotiators. Your outmatchchoice To aNegotiatedAgreement (BATNA). 4. Consider possible targets and bottom lines o f other negotiators. Why do they set their targets and bottom lines at these points? What interests or needs do these positions fulfil? argon your needs or interests and those of the other party vernacularly exclusive? Will gains and losses have to be shared to reach agreement or can you settle with both(prenominal) receiving significant gains? . Consider a range of positions between your target point and bottom line. Each subsequent position after the target point stretch forths more concessions to the other negotiator(s), but is still satisfactory to you. Consider having the following positions for each issue in dispute control surfaceing position. lowly position. Subsequent position. Fall rearward position(yellow sapless that indicates you are close to bottom line parties who want to mediate should stop here so that the intermediary has something to work with). loafer line. 6.Decide if any of your positions meets the interests or needs of the other negotiators. How shou ld your position be limited to do so? 7. Decide when you will move from one position to another. 8. locate the issues to be negotiated into a logical (and beneficial) sequence. 9. Open with an gentle 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 formulate their opening position. 12.If appropriate, move to other positions that crack other negotiator(s) more benefits. 13. Look for a settlement or bargaining range 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 = companionship As standance point b = company As target c = acceptable options for Party A x = Party Bs target y = Party Bs resistance point z = Acceptable options for Party B 15. Look for how position s can be modified to meet all negotiators interests. 16. validate agreements in writing.CHARACTERISTIC BEHAVIORS OF POSITIONAL BARGAINERS sign 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 disclosuresecretive 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 throw 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. rugged on people and problem a great transmit other negotiator is disruptive in the process of problematical 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 bars custom-built solutions Promotes rigid adherence to positions Obscures a focus on interests by premature freight to peculiar(prenominal) 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 privileged information Interest-Based negotiateInterest-based bargaining involves parties in a collaborative effort to jointly meet each others needs and satisfy rough-cut interests. Rather than moving from positions to tax return 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 developing particular proposition solutions. After the interests are identified, the negotiators jointly search for a variety of settlement options that efficiency satisfy all interests, quite 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 thunder the bargaining options so that a wiser decision, with more benefits to all, can be achieved. WHEN IS INTEREST-BASED negociate 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 outcome 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 rivalrous 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. management on interests not positions. Parties timber for nonsubjective or fair standards that all can agree to. Belief that there are probably duplex satisfactory solutions. Negotiators are cooperative problem-solvers rather than opponents. state 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 interestscontent needs (money, time, goods or resources, etc. ) adjective interestsneeds for specific types of behavior or the way that something is done. Relationship or psychological interestsneeds that refe r to how one feels, how one is treated or conditions for ongoing relationship. 1. let out 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. prise 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. throw off sure all interests are unders overlyd. 4. Frame the problem in a way that it is solvable by a win/win solution. revoke egocentricity by framing problem in a manner that all can accept. Include bas ic interests of all parties. exploit 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. cave in binary options for settlement. Present multiple proposals. engage 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. alternate(a) satisfactioneach negotiator gets deoxycytidine monophosphate 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 trad e concessions on issues of high 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. speciate the option generation process from the evaluation process. 9. Work toward agreement. Use the Agreement-in-Principle impact (general level of agreements moving toward more specific agreements). Fractionate ( tell into small pieces) the problem and use a Building-Block Process (agreements on little issues that. when combined, form a general agreement). hack the threat level. Educate and be better 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. indicate 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. bear benefits above and beyond the call of duty. find out and stick to other negotiators that they have been comprehend and unders in additiond. Listen and replicate content to argue reckoning. Listen and restate feelings to essay acceptance (not necessarily agreement) and grounds 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 passing 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 co-ordinated 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 join 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 normally a dynamic process of change. allow 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 fleck others are prescriptivesuggesting what a negotiator should do. We prefer a twelve-stage process that combines the two approaches. STAGES OF NEGOTIATION portray 1Evaluate and take in a Strategy to Guide difficulty Solving Assess various approaches or proceduresnegotiation, facilitation, intermediation, arbitration, cou rt, etc. available for problem solving. distribute an approach. point in time 2 Make part away 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 personal or organizations credibility. Promote commitment to the procedure. Educate and set out input from the parties about the process that is to be used. Stage 3 Collect and hit the books Background Information Collect and take apart relevant data about the people, dynamics and substance involved in the problem. avouch accuracy of data. Minimize the impact of wrong or unavailable data. Identify all parties substantive, procedural and psychological interests. Stage 4 Design a Detailed course of study for Negotiation Identify strategies and play 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 assurance and Cooperation Prepare psychologically to participate in negotiations on substantive issues. Develop a strategy to handle strong emotions. realise 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 session 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 excuse why there is a need for change or agreement. Identify interests and/or positions. Stage 7 Define Issues and Set an Agenda Together identify liberal matter 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 atrocious disagreement and where there is a strong likelihood of agreement. Take turns describing how you see the situation.Participants should be encouraged to fall apart their story in enough detail that all people understand the viewpoint presented. Use active agent listening, open-ended questions and foc utilize questions to gain additional information. Stage 8 Uncover hide 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 expand 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 take a crap the final settlement. look into needs of parties which relate to the issue. Generate criteria or objective standards that can guide settlement discussions. Look for agreements in principle. Consider fault 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. jump off satisfaction so that each party has his/her interests satisfied but at different times. Trade items that are valued otherwise by parties. Look for integrative or win/win options. Brainstorm. Use trial and error generation of multiple solutions. see 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 position/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 inte rests 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 enrolment of appreciation or a legal contract. Detail how settlement is to be enforcedwho, 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 have enforcement and commitment mechanisms Legal contract executing bond Judicial review administrative/executive approval Pre-Mediation Planning forrader 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 elusion 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 better 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 while evaluating your BATNA. WATNA stands for Worst Alternative to Negotiated Agreement. A duplicate of questions you may ask for this analysis are Will the other side probably win in court? Who controls the stipulation quo? If the case doesnt settle, am I t he one who will ultimately lose? The process of BATNA/WATNA analysis ultimately assists a party in determining the background signal 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 prize your case. A good mediator will also assist you in this analysis, but its better to be prepared and wise(p) 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 number one abide. Some experts apprise never, ever to make a first swirl.Others cautiously pep up making a first unfold 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 right on 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 smashed as to make your statements and assertions passim 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 put across 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/demand is outside of their expect range, it can have anger, incredulity or an equally un fairish 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. dont 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 carry as much as possible about all aspects of the dispute before making a final decision. Strategies and Techniques Bargaining Styles Below is a map describing different bargaining styles. Which grade do you fit into? Soft Cooperat ive 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 pasture the relationship. Demand concessions as a condition of therelationship. Separate the people from the problem. Be mild on the people and the problem. Be hard on the problem and the people. Be downy on the people hard on the problem. Trust others. Distrust others. Proceed sovereign 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. invalidate having a bottom line.Accept non-white losses to reach agreement. Demand one-sided gains as the price of agreement. Invent options for mutual gain. Search for the single answer 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 annul a contest of will. Try to win a contest of will. Try to reach a result based on standards independent of will. Yield to public press. Apply pressure. condition and be open to reasons yeild to principle, not pressure. spare 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 * befoolt attack the position, look croup it for interests and motivations * Dont defend your position or statements, instead, invite criticism and suggestions * Dont react, pause or warm up * Dont argue back listen surely and calmly * Reframe accusations as an assault on the problem itself * Ask productive questio nsHard bargaining can arise in definite set 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, paseo 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, scope, specificity and equity. Another form of leverage is ego touch. For some people, being recognized or ac recognizeledged in a p ositive way can cause incredulous 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 transparent.Sometimes, using positive-side leverage such as ego stroking can arouse an eagerness in the other party to punish the pattern 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 keeping a solution or for presenting a good idea. Instead of saying, I want X dollars to replace my damaged roof say, A little while ago, 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 probability to save face. For example, If Im not mistaken, I destine 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 intricate myself a couple of times with the occur of data. Would you like to review that figure and potentially make an adjustment at some point? Be sure to rescind enouraging or doing anything which could result in face-saving-behaviors. face saver behaviors are defensive 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 beh avior 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 ex melts 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 immediately regarding the teachers union, the students can return to school much sooner and cartoon their studies, which is, of course, what we all want. However, some negoti ators may advise 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 mediation experts as an trenchant 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(prenominal) 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 imperious 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 affiliated by the other party.This behavior breaks the vicious bout 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 agr eement. Gift openhanded Giving gifts during negotiation is a great way to generate goodwill, especially at the initiation of bargaining. Small concessions will leave 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 evince flexibility from the other side. If reasonable and accredited 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 power the dispute becomes possible and solutions become more clearly visible.For futher illustration, please view this chart PROBLEM The immediate source of conflict. reading material How people interpret the other partys 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 bracing enough to notice. I will not pay for work you didnt even do. Want to be treated fairly. indispensability to know how much something is going to cost so I can cipher for it. What work was done, what recompense is fair. How rest of capriole will be billed. As a negotiator, it is important to focus on your interests and to resist attempting 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, its 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 management and better understand the major deal points that will solve the dispute. Problems vs. People akin(predicate) 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, disclose 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, ignore 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 attacks, minuscule 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 visual aspect open to further discussion and at the same time reframing the issue to your advantage. Also, it is a good idea to ask sincere questions instead of making demands whenever possible. Instead of pushing the other side to meet your demands, use reframing to bring them to your point of view. Instead of escalating an ar gument, 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 life-and-death 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 smooth reframing opportunities, greater leverage, and an improved 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. stack Killers In every negotiation, the possibility of failure exists. Certain conditions, behaviors, or acts threaten to carrell 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. privy Emotion Example I would rather lose than settle with this guy This leads to misevaluation. 3. disappointment to Understand BATNA/WATNA Leads to misevaluation. 4. Biased Assimilation Parties tend to hear and remember things they want to hear, and not hear things that are unpleasant.This leads to misevaluation. 5. Loss plague People generally prefer to avoid loss rather than to achieve gains. This leads to excessive attachment to positions. 6. Direct Contradiction overturn 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 want Parties may seek to return to the lieu Quo Ante that is, the state they were in prior to when the particular conflict arose, or to reclaim 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 post and interests, 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 liquid ways to provide counter arguments or methods of avoiding those deal breakers.