Six habits of merely effective negotiators.

نویسنده

  • J K Sebenius
چکیده

Most executives know the basics of negotiation; some are spectacularly adept. Yet even experienced negotiators routinely leave money on the table, end up in deadlock, damage relationships, or allow conflicts to spiral. They fall prey to common mistakes that keep them from solving the right negotiation problem. In any negotiation, each side ultimately chooses between two options: accepting a deal or taking its best no-deal option--that is, the course of action if a deal were not possible. As a negotiator, you seek to advance your interests by persuading the other side to say yes to a proposal that meets your interests better than your best no-deal option. Because the other side will say yes only to a proposal that meets its own interests better than its best no-deal option, you must understand and shape your counterpart's decision so that it chooses in its own interest what you want. Far from being exercises in manipulation, understanding your counterpart's interests and shaping the decision so that the other side agrees to a proposal for its own reasons are the keys to jointly creating and claiming sustainable value from a negotiation. In this article, James Sebenius compares good negotiating practice with bad, providing examples from the business world and insights from 50 years of research and analysis on negotiation. The author describes six common mistakes that result in merely effective negotiation: neglecting your counterpart's problem, letting price bulldoze other interests, letting positions drive out interests, searching too hard for common ground, neglecting no-deal alternatives, and failing to correct for skewed vision.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Is there a place for sympathy in negotiation? Finding strength in weakness ¬リニ

Across five studies, we investigate the use of appeals to the moral emotion of sympathy in negotiations. We find that negotiators who actively appeal to the sympathy of their counterparts achieve improved outcomes, both in terms of distributive value claiming as well as integrative value creation. We also compare the effects of sympathy appeals to appeals based on rationality and fairness, and ...

متن کامل

Unfixing the fixed pie: a motivated information-processing approach to integrative negotiation.

Negotiators tend to believe that own and other's outcomes are diametrically opposed. When such fixed-pie perceptions (FPPs) are not revised during negotiation, integrative agreements are unlikely. It was predicted that accuracy motivation helps negotiators to release their FPPs. In 2 experiments, accuracy motivation was manipulated by (not) holding negotiators accountable for the manner in whic...

متن کامل

Effects of Introducing Survival Behaviours into Automated Negotiators

With the rise of distributed e-commerce in recent years, demand for automated negotiation has increased. In turn, this has facilitated a demand for ever more complex algorithms to conduct these negotiations. However, building robust automated negotiators able to survive and succeed in growing negotiation communities is difficult. As the complexity of these algorithms increases, our ability to r...

متن کامل

Origins of Food Preference in Herbivores

Food preference is best understood as the interaction between taste and postingestive feedback, determined by an animal's physiological condition and to a food's chemical characteristics. Taste (as well as smell and sight) enables animals to discriminate among foods and provides hedonic sensations associated with eating. Postingestive feedback calibrates taste in accord with a food's homeostati...

متن کامل

Reversing the Gender Gap in Negotiations: An Exploration of Stereotype Regeneration

We examine how gender stereotypes affect performance in mixed-gender negotiations. We extend recent work demonstrating that stereotype activation leads to a male advantage and a complementary female disadvantage at the bargaining table (Kray, Thompson, & Galinsky, 2001). In the present investigation, we regenerate the stereotype of effective negotiators by associating stereotypically feminine s...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Harvard business review

دوره 79 4  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2001