Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving in by Roger Fisher and Willian Ury

NEGOTIATION

Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In by Roger Fisher and Willian Ury provides guidelines on ways of carrying out negotiations successful. It explains the importance of principled negotiations and the approach that negotiators should take to ensure that they arrive at win-win situations during negotiations. Notably, I have learned that positional bargaining, the approach most of us take when negotiating is ineffective. One should engage in principled negotiations for them to arrive at long-lasting solutions.

Notably, positional bargaining does not result in effective agreements. The approach does not aim at maintaining a positive relationship between the negotiators and this makes it impossible for the approach to arrive at amicable solutions (Ury & Fisher 7). For instance, when President Kennedy of the US was negotiating with the Soviet government about the usage of nuclear weapons, both parties opted for positional bargaining. In the end, the talks between the two parties were abandoned since they could not reach an amicable solution (Ury & Fisher 8).

Another method of effective negotiation is the principled negotiation. The approach advocates for the use of four points during negotiations. The first point is the people. During negotiations, it is critical for a negotiator to differentiate between the people and issues. One should focus on solving the issues at hand and not attacking the other negotiators. The second point is the interest. The approach advocates that one should consider their interests and not take a position during negotiations. The third point is the available options. A negotiator should focus on coming up with several possibilities before choosing what to do. The last point is the criteria. Negotiations should follow an objective procedure (Ury & Fisher 10-11).

According to Ury & Fisher (27), the most powerful interests are basic human wants. If a negotiator keeps these interests in mind during negotiations, it becomes easy for them to come up with a deal that favors both parties. Basic human wants include the need for recognition and security, the ability to control one's life, and economic prosperity among others (Ury & Fisher 27).

BATNA can be defined as the Best Alternative To A Negotiated Agreement. A negotiate should formulate BATNAs before engaging in negotiates since they enable them to decide on the least acceptable deal and this keeps one from exploitation. Also, BATNAs keep one from walking away from a deal that serves their interest (Ury & Fisher 51). On top of this, BATNAs keep one becoming a victim of dirty tricks.

Significantly, some negotiators use tricky tactics such as deliberate manipulation and psychological warfare to cause others into agreeing to unsuitable deals. Deliberate deception occurs when a negotiator misinterprets information that is critical to the negotiations intentionally or holds back the information. In this case, separating people from issues is a good way of overcoming the trick. Again, a negotiator can use psychological warfare to win. For instance, they can choose an unfavorable location for the negotiations. The other negotiator can change the location and choose a more suitable environment (Ury & Fisher 67-68).