Introduction
The aim of this essay is to present negotiation skills based on practical life situation. In this class, five negotiation skills were discussed. The skills give one the power to enter hard negotiation situations and win them. In this paper, the practical negotiation skills execution is based on the BATNA, a model which offers a person the source of power while on the negotiating table. It stands out from this exercise that the understanding of one’s BATNA is the best way of ensuring one gets assured of power at the negotiation table.
BATNA as the Source of Power While on the Negotiation Table
Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement refers to the best plan a negotiator has on his or her mind, in the event the other party is not willing to reach a specific agreement. It is important to always have a BATNA when entering negotiations. A BATNA is a major part of the three main sources of negotiating power when at the bargaining table (Carrell & Heavrin, 2008). The significance of the BATNA arises from the fact that it is never guaranteed that the negotiated agreement may be reached. However, the BATNA that a person holds must also be quite strong ( Pinkley et al., 2017) . To develop a strong BATNA, the negotiator is supposed to understand what constitutes the other partner’s best alternatives to the negotiation process. Benefits of a strong BATNA include affording a person the power and opportunity of comfortably walking away from an unappealing deal ( Kim & Fragale, 2005) . Absence of a strong BATNA implies staying desperate to securing any deal that comes one’s way regardless of whether it is appealing or unappealing. For instance, a home buyer may be able to develop the power he or she needs to reject an unattractive deal through searching and finding another equally interesting house.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Notably, the reason people negotiate is to achieve good results for both themselves and stakeholders. The very last result of a negotiation process is made good depending on a number of factors including how best a negotiator understands the other party on the negotiating table. Moreover, the best negotiator does know the main factors which drive a negotiation process. A negotiation has its content and the individual vested interests ( Brett, 2007) . It is easy to visualize the contents of negotiations since they are expressed in hard copies. However, the personal interests and goals of each party on the negotiating table is always not known. Each individual knows what sends him or her onto the negotiating table. However, a witty party can decipher and discern the interests of the other person on the negotiating through application of the skills of negotiation.
The Case Facts
The case chosen in this paper for application of negotiation skills is a real situation which entails unhappy co-owners. In this case, I take the position of a son who has inherited from my parents half of an undivided interest in a summer home. The home sits on a prime acreage nearby a lake. My co-owner is my father’s friend who is also a partner in a number of other enterprises. The way the house is used does not please me at all. For many years, the house has been used interchangeably by me and the other family during weekends and holidays. Currently, my co-owner is of the plan to sell the home to a developer who can re-develop it into four upscale vacation homes. On my part, I am opposed to the plan of selling the home, but do want to buy out the interest of he co-owner at the current fair market value. Notably, the only challenge is that the fair market value of the property is way below what my co-owner thinks. Therefore, no agreement is reached and in the end my co-owner simply decides to sell the property to a third party.
The new buyer tries to buy me out of the property. It is a proposal that I flatly refuse to accept. On this development, the third party decides to start changing the property without my participation or consultation. When I complain, he threatens to petition the courts to sell the land so that we both lose the land. Therefore, I choose to try and negotiate a deal with him so that I continue to use the property just like before he came on board. However, to achieve this goal, the third party has to be convinced to stop any plans of changing the property.
My Approach to this Negotiation Situation
One important fact I must note from this case is that the transactions and relationships between me and both the original and current co-owners have strongly deteriorated. I, therefore, understand the level of hardship I am bound to meet when trying to negotiate with a person whom we are not in good terms. Currently, the relationship is a zero-sum condition. The negotiation will be characteristic of the distributive bargaining relationship.
I will use information as a source of power in this negotiation process. The strategic advantage in this distributive bargaining situation is gained from the amount of information that a person holds while starting to negotiate ( Sebenius, 2017) . The information referred to in this case is about the objectives and personal interests of the other party. I will strive to understand the desires and reasoning orientation of the new co-owner. I will assume that the new co-owner is guarding some information from me, which is quiet significant for me optimize my bargaining power over him. If it were an integrative bargaining relationship, I would understand that there is information left on the negotiating table. However, for the distributive relationship, information always exists. This existent information remains hidden and kept close to the heart of the other party in a bargaining process. Moreover, there is always the quest for discovering much information about the objectives of the other party in the distributive bargaining relationship.
I will read the verbal and non-verbal cues from the new co-owner to learn what he holds as his desires, interests, personal goals and mind orientation as far as this negotiation is concerned. At the same time, I will try to ensure that the person does not learn my core aim in this negotiation process. My aim will be to ensure he accepts to stop implementing any change on the property so that I continue with my earlier lifestyle on it.
My BATNA in this negotiation process will be to let the court sell the property. I am quite certain that the new co-owner has high interest in making more improvements on the property before he sells his interest in it. Therefore, I the court is allowed to force the sale of the property, then a much lower price will be realized than expected by the new co-owner. Apart from holding onto this important BATNA, I will also apply the bracketing strategy. It means I will offer suggestions with conditions which have to be complied with by the new co-owner.
Conclusion
I believe that my approach to this negotiation process will greatly enable me achieve the best result I want. By applying BATNA identified in the paper, I will be able to avoid taking an agreement that contains unappealing deals to me. BATNA should be encouraged since it is the model which enables one to realize his personal desires and goals despite the agreement failing. The challenge is simply in the way of accurately identifying the hidden interests and personal goals of parties in negotiation. Other parties will always not be ready to open up their key interests in the negotiating process. The following section of the paper applies various negotiation skills to the case of the unhappy co-owner.
References
Brett, J. M. (2007). Negotiating globally: How to negotiate deals, resolve disputes, and make decisions across cultural boundaries . John Wiley & Sons.
Carrell, M.R. & Heavrin, C. (2008). Negotiating essentials: Theory, skills, and practices . Upper Saddle, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Kim, P. H., & Fragale, A. R. (2005). Choosing the path to bargaining power: an empirical comparison of BATNAs and contributions in negotiation. Journal of Applied Psychology , 90 (2), 373.
Pinkley, R. L., Conlon, D. E., Sawyer, J. E., Sleesman, D. J., Vandewalle, D., & Kuenzi, M. (2017). Unpacking BATNA Availability: How Probability Can Impact Power in Negotiation. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2017, No. 1, p. 16888). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
Sebenius, J. K. (2017). BATNA s in Negotiation: Common Errors and Three Kinds of “No”. Negotiation Journal , 33 (2), 89-99.
