According to craver (2004 1), an exhaustive preparation before starting the negotiations, is very important step towards a successful negotiation. Information on relevant facts and issues like the economic, legal and political issues need to be provided to enable the negotiators understand their party as well as their opponents. The negotiator may endeavour to hear from each party separately to understand the issues of contention among the conflicting parties. The process can also be called an orientation and fact finding stage since it is at this stage that information about the organization of the opposing side is provided. Before any negotiations, Pirani (2009 1) suggests that, people should determine whether there in a reason to begin negotiations anyway. There should be clarity on want they want to negotiate about and then set out some specific agendas before the start of the negotiations. At this stage, representatives of a party to be involved in the negotiations are identified and their responsibilities and authority in the negotiating process are well defined. The people identified to be involved in the talks must be well equipped with information about the organization and structure of the opposing party. This will be crucial in helping them to have the true picture of their opponents and enable them to analyse their needs, motivations and aims in comparison to those of their own party. This will provide them with the conflicting issues to be addressed after comparing their demand with those of their own party. After all the relevant information has been gathered, the negotiators should try to explore and discuss all the possible outcomes that might be arrived at in the negotiations. They should discuss for example, what will happen in an event where their opponents fail to compromise their position during the talks They should seek for the best alternative in case of any negative eventuality resulting from their negotiations. The venue of the meeting and the time is then identified at this stage. The time and the venue should always favour both parties.
The second stage of the negotiation process will seek to establish the identity of the negotiators and then set the tone for the negotiations. The negotiators will engage in some basic talks which will seem harmless and unoffending to enable them find some areas of common interest. This is important in the negotiations because if you find some thing that you share in your opponent, then you will tend to like him and in the process set some positive response towards achieving the desired goal.
According to Pirani (2009 1), this stage will aim at developing the foundation of the discussion without bringing in the details of the negotiations. This will make the negotiators share and agree on the basic concepts of the agreement that should be arrived at, at the end of their talks without necessarily discussing the details. It is at this stage that the roles and objectives of each party are well defined and through this, they establish some level of compatibility. This will set a positive mood to the discussions and generate the targeted mutual accords and at the end help the two groups achieve efficient agreements. Conditions for the partnership are re-framed to suit to both groups. This is achieved by allowing each side provide their position and incorporate them to fit to the partys individual demands.
The third stage involves serious discussions of the issues of contention, hard bargains and decision making. At this stage there is information exchange between the two groups, the parties begin to brainstorm on substantive issues to be negotiated. This can be achieved through asking of broad open ended questions, which require explanations and not short answers. This will enable the negotiators disclose more details on issues affecting them thinking that their opponents know about them. They should start narrowing down to specific areas when they are sure that they know enough about their opponents and these question will now aim at clarifying specific areas on what they might have been told. Negotiators should listen more keenly on leak end of their opponents as they explain their demands. The best example here is the choice of word for instance, the oppornents man say that they want a certain item, say item A, they can also say they need another item, say item B, or they can also say that they could like to have another item, say item C. there will be different interpretations of each of the above demands. This will imply that the first item is compulsory, but the second one is necessary to them but not compulsory while the last item is just optional. Such loose ends should help in the talks in an attempt of striking am agreement.
Sometimes the opponents can ask very confidential questions that the other party will not be willing to answer. Politicians found in such a point where they are fixed between a wall and a hard place choose to divert the question by either overemphasising on a small part of the question while the other part that is confidential is left unanswered or sometimes some of them in an attempt to hide such confidentiality misinterpret the question intentionally and answer the misinterpreted question. Others choose to ignore the question or refuse to answer the question completely (Craver, 2004 4). These, according to Craver, are blocking techniques which are common in any negotiation.
The next stage is called the distributive stage. Distributive in the sense that the talks shifts from inquiring about what the other party wants in the negotiations to what they must obtain themselves or what they are willing to take so as to sign the deal or the agreement. This is a very crucial stage in the negotiations since the side that unknowingly ignore the aspect of competition will lose to the manipulations of their counterparts who will maximize on their weaknesses. This stage is, according to Craver, the value claiming stage because parties are trying to determine what they are going to get out of the deal. This calls for the parties to set hard-line, well defined and firm positions before they enter this stage of negotiations. They should agree on concession patterns that will enable them get a fair deal out of the agreements. At this stage they should not be the ones to make their compromising offer first. Mostly the side that makes their offer first are likely to disclose a mistake which the other party may take advantage against them. Another advantage of waiting for the other side to determine their position is to enable you to start your negotiations at a point that this far away focusing that at the mid point from where the other party is, to where you will propose your offer, you shall have obtained a fair deal. There are other tactics that will help a party in their negotiations. These tactics are patience and silence. If the other side makes an offer, and their opponent keep silent, the group that had given the offer will feel uncomfortable by the silence and make another offer quickly to soften their stand. It is always wise to remain silent and if they remain silent too, try to ask them whether they are preparing to answer or what they might be thinking about such an offer. Threats and warnings are normally used to generate some responses from the other party. On the other side of the threats and warnings, there are promises. Threats and warnings indicate that if the other side improves on the offer they will also do the same. Throughout the negotiating period, the negotiators should remain focused to their current alternatives.
At the stage of setting an agreement, it is advisable to take time and not rush into agreements. Less competitive bargainers will always rush into an agreement since the nature of human beings is to sign an agreement and move to something else. This stage is a time for being calm and taking deliberate actions. The parties should be careful not to jump into concessions which are not reciprocated by the other group. They should however try to make the other party to feel that the only solution of achieving a consensus is for the other group to move towards their side. this can be achieved by showing high degree of the inner patience.
The last stage of negotiations involves cooperation and then a follow up. The cooperation stage involves the reaching of a tentative agreement and shaking of hands. It is wrong to end up such an involving and shoulder rubbing negotiation without shaking hands with your opponents. This stage is necessary because it shows that the conflicting parties have maximized on their mutual benefits obtained from the agreement or deal. Acuff (2008 9) observes that this stage is often forgotten by the negotiators. It is through an effective follow up that you set a stage for the next negotiations. Remind the other side that they made a good decision in reaching the agreed upon decision.
It is not easy to come up to an agreement more especially when both sides feel that they have been offended and therefore should be given the lions share of the deal. It will need high levels of compromise on both parties to be able to attain an amicable solution to the disagreement where everybody will be satisfied.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment