Negotiation processes may lead one to distributive bargaining situations. Distributive bargaining is also known as zero-sum kind of negotiation. This is because one party in the negotiation processes needs to lose so that the other wins. The main aim in this kind of bargaining is to try and obtain a maximum share from what is being distributed. Both negotiators may be forced to become manipulative, deceptive or secretive. For example, one party in the negotiation process may end up withholding information that would be of importance to the other party to their advantage. When this happens, bargaining tactics and strategies are needed to reach an agreement. Moreover, this strategy is applicable in cases where the products in play do not have a fixed price. In this case, as a public administrator looking forward to purchasing a new home, I have to effectively apply the five skills needed in distributive bargaining. This way, I will be able to work within my budget and get the house.
One of the skills needed in this negotiation process is identifying the interests of the seller. Making an effort to understand the interests of the one selling me the house will give me an added advantage in terms of my bargaining power. Listening actively to what the seller says would help understand what the asset being sold. It will also be possible to identify feelings of desperation or frustration behind the message from the seller (Carrel & Heavrin, 2008) . For instance, asking a lot of questions about the house will be a way to make the seller open up. Thinking that he is creating an unfair advantage in my end, he will end up revealing all his interests. Moreover, I will be able to evaluate the seller’s intolerant point, his target and cost incurred if he does not conclude the bargaining process. To become a better deal maker, I will ensure that our differences will not dominate our discussion. Additionally, another important skill is interdependency (Carrel & Heavrin, 2008) . This is a trick that I will apply to show the seller that am comfortable with any outcome of our negotiation process. If he detects desperation when negotiating, he might take advantage of the situation. It’s also wise to show that am willing to try other sellers if he is not ready to come to terms with my offers. To achieve the effectiveness of manipulation, I may adopt an action that’s disruptive, schedule manipulation or coalition with other sellers.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Successful distributive bargaining requires establishing a common ground of the negotiation process. This will be possible after the seller expresses himself based on what he likes and dislikes. Before making any opening offer, common goals should be identified (Chapman, Miles & Maurer, 2017) . For instance, my seller wants to get a promotion from the company he works with once he has made a sale. In my case, I need the house since I have to relocate to that city. Additionally, one can use this skill to identify the walk away from the value of the seller and try to create a negotiation scenario aimed at getting closer to understanding the common goals between the two parties. Once this is established, another skill to consider is flexibility. Therefore, I have to make an opening offer that’s easily flexible and not unrealistic. The last skill is exercising my decision- making ability. I have to ensure that the final outcome of this bargaining process does not make me work outside my working budget. I have to ensure that a win-lose situation is achieved amidst a heated and volatile negotiation. Additionally, there has to be an analysis of the costs and risks involved in the transaction (Carrel & Heavrin, 2008) .
The bargaining situation which definitely ended up to be distributive had already begun. This was the nest challenge that involved taking a position in the negotiation. One of the effective ways to take the position was to take the liberty of presenting the initial offer to the seller of $290,000. It was important to make concessions during this process. Additionally, a price that was below my target price was the only sure way to realize the emotions from him. Looking at him, he seemed not convinced. He had expected a higher offer. However, his reactions had depicted that he was a moderate bargainer. He mentioned that the house could not be bought at that amount. Some of the reasons he gave were the strategic position the house was located and the fact that it was near town. He countered my offer by asking for $350,000. At this point, I had to consider adjusting my offer to ensure that the deal is not closed just yet. This would also be a way to influence the seller's target value (Carrel & Heavrin, 2008) . Luckily, I pointed out that the house was not well preserved and needed a lot of work including painting it. I had also done some research around that area and advised by several people that houses don’t go for more than $300,000. The price being not within my target price, I asked him to lower down the amount to a reasonable price. I was willing to give him a duration of 60 days telling him that he would not get a better offer than the one that I had given him. In the end, he reduced the price to $330,000 saying that was his final offer. In my case, I promised to pay him $300,000 and not add an extra penny. However, he remained adamant saying that’s his final offer.
Having it in mind that the seller had mentioned that this was the last sale he had to make to get a promotion in his firm, I hopefully had to close the deal stating that I was no longer interested with buying that house. I did this with the hope that the seller would agree to mention a final offer to the house. On my way out, the seller called me back and asked if I would part away with $310,000 for the house. He stated that he wouldn’t agree to sell that house for that amount of money, but he badly needed the promotion. I pretended not to be much excited though deep inside I knew that I had achieved my target price.
In conclusion, we came to an understanding and managed to purchase the new house at $310,000. The need to document the agreement was also to take place in this last stage. This way, there would be no changes to be affected afterward. Additionally, the signing of the document between I and the Seller would help prevent future disagreements (Carrel & Heavrin, 2008) . It’s also important to note that the whole distributive negotiation process would not have been possible if I had not taken my time to understand the seller and most of his goals. Moreover, the bargaining power had also been greatly influenced by getting information about my seller and those living around where the house was located. Information is key for the buyer to gain a tactical advantage in this type of negotiation (Brett & Thompson, 2016). The knowledge of the seller’s walk away values had also put me in a better position to put him in a fixed position and influence his response. Though the final outcome had been a win-lose situation, I was very happy to obtain that house. Additionally, the skills and techniques used in distributive bargaining are very vital in establishing such situations.
References
Brett, J., & Thompson, L. (2016). Negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.
Carrell, M. R., & Heavrin, C. (2008). Negotiating essentials: theory, skills, and practices . Prentice Hall.s
Chapman, E., Miles, E. W., & Maurer, T. (2017). A proposed model for effective negotiation skill development. Journal of Management Development , 36 (7), 940-958.
