Recently, we have conducted negotiations, which I have recorded and present below. In fact, negotiations have proved to be a very useful experience for me, although I had substantial problems while conducting negotiations I had to use all my skills and abilities to conduct negotiations successfully. At the same time, this experience helped me to learn to come prepared to different situations in the course of negotiations, including the most difficult ones.
In the course of negotiations I have conducted, I applied different negotiation techniques and have to use different strategies to complete negotiations successfully. I participated in three negotiation simulations, including two face-to-face negotiation simulations and one remote, multiple negotiation. In fact, each negotiation simulation had its own specificities but I believe that I have managed to conduct all negotiation simulations successfully.
Hinchinbrook Island negotiation
The Hinchinbrook Island negotiation was the first negotiation I was involved in. Initially, we had substantial distinction. In fact, we stood on quite different grounds in the negotiations. At first, I attempted to insist on my position as the only possible, correct and acceptable position. I attempted to be bold and determined to stand on my ground till the end of negotiations. However, in the course of the negotiation, I have revealed the fact that my position was destructive. To put it more precisely, my boldness turned to be a sort of stubbornness that lead the negotiation to the dead-end because the opposite party stood on quite a different ground and rejected my requirements and propositions. Moreover, my persistence and intention to stand on my ground till the end of the negotiation led to the opposite outcomes compared to those I counted on before I started the negotiation. In fact, I failed to persuade my opponents in my righteousness. At any rate, they refused to accept my position as the basis for the agreement. Instead, they insisted on the compromise that could meet their expectations and requirements, at least partially.
The more I insisted on my position the more reluctant the opposite party became. Eventually, I understood that my position was destructive because, if I fail to come to agreement with the opposite party, I will fail the negotiation.
Naturally, I could not admit the failure of the negotiation and I attempted to find the plausible solution that could meet needs and interests of both parties involved in the negotiation process. Nevertheless, I have never given in to the opposite party. Instead, I suggested to refuse from of my points, which were not vitally important for me in this negotiation but I also insisted on the mutual response from the opposite party expecting to find the plausible solution to the negotiation that moved steadily to the dead-end, if we failed to find a compromise. Eventually, the opposite party accepted my major requirements and agreed to refuse from its requirements, which were absolutely unacceptable for me. Eventually, we agreed to introduce the shuttle bus and accommodations using the solar power, whereas I had to promise high profits to the local community. At the same time, the opposite was reluctant to accept the shuttle bus but the use of the solar power proved to be the argument that persuaded my opponents and allowed to find the agreement in the course of the negotiation. In such a way, the negotiation was completed relatively successfully.
The e-negotiation was conducted online and this was the remote negotiation. In fact, this negotiation was similar in a way to the first negotiation because of the high distinction. At this point, I would like to place emphasis on the fact that we used e-mails to conduct negotiations. Frankly speaking, it was a bit inconvenient for me because, in the course of the first negotiation, I got used to see the opposite party and to conduct the negotiation face-to-face.
However, in this negotiation, I did not even see the opposite party but I had to conduct the negotiation. In fact, it was as if I conducted the negotiation being blind or my eyes being folded. Our team just got messages from the opposite party and we had to response to conduct the negotiation. What was the most difficult for me in the course of this negotiation was the fact that I could not see the emotional response of the opposite party on my propositions and requirements. In fact, I wish I had seen the reaction of the opposite party to our e-mails but, being separated physically, I could not see their reactions and that made the negotiation process a bit difficult for me. This is probably why the outcome of the negotiation was a bit surprising for our team because we suggested to make a certain number of orders, whereas the opposite party insisted on the increase of the price. We could not come to agreement and we were running out of time. Eventually, we suggested to increase the number of items ordered and expected to the positive response from the opposite party. Fortunately, they agreed on our suggestion but they insisted on the increase of the price per item ordered. I believe that we could conduct the negotiation more successfully, if I could see the emotional response of the opposite party to our suggestion and we could save our time through face-to-face negotiation instead of online negotiation. On the other hand, the online, remote negotiation has proved to be very efficient when the party involved in the negotiation process are separated and are located in different parts of the country or even the world. In such a way, it is very convenient to conduct negotiation online, when the physical distance between the negotiating parties is significant.
The next negotiation was probably the most difficult because this was the multiple negotiation. In fact, I was not even surprised that this negotiation had the high distinction. It seems to me that the distinction of this negotiation was the highest among the three simulations. However, I came prepared to the high distinction because I understood that the involvement of multiple parties in the negotiation process naturally evokes significant difficulties in regard to the successful accomplishment of the negotiation to meet needs and interests of all parties involved in the negotiation process. In fact, the multiple negotiation was a complex process because our team had to agree our position with multiple parties. As a result, we faced substantial problems when we had to come to agreement with the opposite, whereas our rivals could have made a better bid and we could have lost the negotiation. In this regard, we did our best to conduct the negotiation successfully. We focused on the analysis of the position of our rivals and attempted to develop plausible offer to the target party. In fact, it was difficult to participate in the multiple negotiation because we could not propose the best conditions of the offer for our team. The rivalry forced our team to decrease our requirements and make a better offer that would be more costly for our team but this offer could give us a chance to win the negotiation, which was our ultimate goal. In the course of this negotiation we focused on the proposition of the affordable price for our services, which naturally attracted the target party. In addition, we insisted that we could have introduced consistent improvements in our performance and the quality of our service would improve in the course of time. As a result, we have managed to win the negotiation, although the conditions of the agreement were not perfect for our team but it was more important for us to win the award, whereas conditions of the agreement were plausible enough.
The preparation for the negotiation is the crucial stage which lays the foundation to the successful negotiation. At first, we divided responsibilities without our team to make our team work effective. To put it more precisely, we divided our team respectively to objectives and responsibilities in terms of the negotiation. Some team members focused on the analysis of the background of the case to conduct the negotiation effectively. Other team members focused on the potential strengths of our team in the negotiation, which can use in the course of the negotiation.
Other team members focused on weaknesses of the opposite party to use them in the course of the negotiation and to reach our strategic goals. As for me, I worked on the elaboration of our goals to win the negotiation with the opposite party. In this regard, I focused on the analysis of our interests and needs as well as our target party, Zijan Company.
In fact, I understood that the implementation of the project we were going to work on could uncover our secret technology to Zijan Company could put us into a disadvantageous position. I believed that, if we uncovered our secret technology, Zijan Company would simply refuse from our services and complete the project on its own without our assistance as soon as they got our secret technology. Therefore, I set keeping our secret technology unrecovered for Zijan Company as the strategic goal in our negotiation. At the same time, I was conscious of the fact that we should make a plausible offer to Zijan Company instead. Therefore, I set another goal ”“ to reduce small and unsafe mines and optimize the work of large ones, making them safer and more effective.
Plan for the final group negotiation simulation
The plan for the group negotiation simulation was relatively simple but quite effective. First, we set goals, which were wanted to achieve in the course of the negotiation. In fact, we set maximum and minimal goals. As a result, we could have two options to choose from in the course of the negotiation respectively to the response of the target party. Second, we defined the strategy and methods we were going to use in the course of the negotiation. This step was very important because the choice of methods helped us to define the most efficient methods among the variety of methods and strategies we could have used in the course of the negotiation. Furthermore, we developed step-by-step plan using the decision tree and offering alternatives in case of failure of our propositions at different stages of the implementation of the plan. After that, the stage of the implementation of the plan came. In fact, we planned to implement the plan successfully and to reach our goals. On the other hand, we developed the control system, which included monitoring of the negotiation process and its assessment. If we identified any problems, we would introduce changes in our plan of negotiation to complete it successfully. Finally, we plan the evaluation of the outcomes of the negotiation and its assessment.
Reflection on the final group negotiation simulation
On analyzing our final group negotiation simulation, I would like to place emphasis on the fact that I find it quite effective and successful because we have a clear and concise plan of action. Moreover, our plan is flexible because we foresee different possibilities of the development of the negotiation process. Hence, we can count for the successful outcome of the negotiation and I believe we can reach our goals successfully. As I prepare for the negotiation, I am conscious of the fact that the effective and successful negotiation process is possible on the condition of accurate preparation for the negotiation. While working on our group negotiation simulation, we decided to meet regularly to discuss the preparation of the negotiation process. The final group negotiation simulation was particularly challengeable because it was necessary to conduct the negotiation from the beginning, including setting of goals and elaboration of the plan of negotiation, to the final stage and successful accomplishment of the negotiation. In this regard, the use of the decision tree proved to be particularly efficient in regard to the development of effective solutions to possible problems that could have arisen in the course of the implementation of the negotiation plan.