1/30/2014
Comms 336
Negotiation analysis
The situation that I was given for this negotiation assignment was the role of
P.W. Roland, a production manager for the San Jose Mercury News. During this
negotiation my assigned goal was to find a way to attain three-thousand oranges
which were considered to be extremely rare. The problem that was given was that I
would be in competition for these oranges with a competing company that wished
to use these same oranges for medicinal purposes. For me to successfully navigate
this assignment I decided that I would need to learn the goals of my competitor,
potentially re-evaluate and change my initial goals, and use strategic techniques to
negotiate and successfully attain the oranges while saving my company the
maximum amount of money.
When starting this role-play scenario I initially read the prompt and jumped to
many conclusions that I later found to be wrong. The first of which was noticing that
the green paper (my paper) said nothing about the competitions need for these
oranges. It stated that their doctor, Dr. Jones, had developed a synthetic chemical
for curing and preventing Rudosen, however, it said nothing specific about needing
these oranges for her research. This lack of information on my part lead me to my
first goal, which was to find out IF the other team did in fact need these oranges,
and what exactly where they needed for.
This solution very much differed from my earlier goals. My earlier goals did
not take into account the fact that each organization would have separate uses for
the oranges, and be able to divide up the parts for our individual needs. Initially my
goals were to low-ball the competition and try to get them on a lower price;
however, once we discussed our organizations goals and needs we both understood
that it wasnt as simple as haggling over a singular price.
When looking at the fisher handout I began to circle negotiation tactics that I
wanted to try and ones that I wanted to avoid. I looked at the soft side and the hard
side, picking and choosing what attributes/tactics seemed best. On the soft side I
felt that I should be willing to change positions easily, make offers, search for the
single answer, and most importantly, understand that the goal is agreement. I also
felt that I should avoid trusting others, believing that the participants are friends,
and disclosing my bottom line. In the hard column I felt I should distrust others,
mislead as to my bottom line, and make sure that I remember that my participants
are my adversaries. There were several traits that I felt to avoid such as making
threats and demand concessions as a condition of the relationship.
When looking at the Fisher handout, I primarily focused on my personal
strengths and weaknesses. I knew that I can be too trusting of a person and that I
want to compromise and collaborate. I also knew that I am bad at putting pressure
on my competition and being tough competition. So the benefit of the Fisher
handout for me was that I was able to recognize my bad habits and focus on trying
to change them.
Overall this exercise gave me the opportunity to work on my negotiation
tactics, specifically the ones where I felt I was weakest. While I may not have
achieved all of my personal goals while negotiating, such as holding firm on a price
or mistrusting the competition, I was still able to achieve my more important goals
and feel that I came out on top of my competition. I learned that one needs to be
fluid in their goals and achievements, especially in terms of negotiation, and that
coming to a mutually beneficial solution doesnt mean that I have failed as a
negotiator. Thanks to this exercise I will be more prepared the next time I negotiate.