Each has a target point that defines what he or she

This preview shows page 7 - 10 out of 29 pages.

Each has a target point that defines what he or she would like to achieve. Each also has a resistance point, which marks the lowest outcome that is acceptable. The area between these two
points makes up each one’s aspiration range . As long as there is some overlap between A and B’s aspiration ranges, there exists settlement range where each one’s aspirations can be met. When engaged in distributive bargaining, research consistently shows one of the best things you can do is make the first offer , and make it an aggressive one - this is called anchoring the first person to speak up is typically views himself as having the most power Another reason, the anchoring bias, was mentioned is that people tend to fixate on initial information. A savvy negotiator sets an anchor with the initial offer, and scores of negotiation studies show that such anchors greatly favor the person who sets it. Another distributive bargaining tactic is revealing a deadline this really works, in part because people don't think it does Integrative bargaining - negotiation that seeks one or more settlements that can create a win- win situation Integrative bargaining assumes a win-win solution is possible - labor unions - (in general this is the prefered bargaining philosophy) Integrative bargaining typically leads to better outcomes. In part because the distributive approach often has a critical logical flaw, because the bargaining chips aren't always worth the same to each side thus, I might really want a bonus, but they might really want a low salary, so we're both willing to trade off Because integrative bargaining builds long-term relationships and facilitates working together in the future, it bonds negotiators and allows each to leave the bargaining table feeling victorious. So, why don't we see more integrative bargaining?? Let's look at the necessary conditions parties who are open with information and candid about their concerns a sensitivity by both parties to the other's needs the ability to trust one another a willingness by both parties to maintain flexibility are these 4 things too much to ask/expect? Maybe. Compromise might be your worst enemy in negotiating a win-win agreement The reason is that compromising reduces the pressure to bargain integratively. After all, if you or your opponent caves in easily, it doesn’t require anyone to be creative to reach a settlement. Thus, people end up settling for less than they could have obtained if they had been forced to consider the other party’s interests, trade off issues, and be creative.
Think of the classic example in which two sisters are arguing over who gets an orange. Unknown to them, one sister wants the orange to drink the juice, whereas the other wants the orange peel to bake a cake. If one sister simply capitulates and gives the other sister the orange, they will not be forced to explore their reasons for wanting the orange, and thus they will never find the win-win solution: They could each have the orange because they want different parts of it!

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture