Past No, Author gave a strategy for negotiating
with stubborn opponent. They said that there are ways of dealing with
uncooperative behaviour. Author in “Getting to Yes”
told that agreements should be wise to maintain relationships with parties.
Author said that negotiations are generally happen in form of positional
bargaining in which each party bargain over a price as per their position. And I believe it is an inefficient way of doing agreement as it disregard
the parties’ interests. It leads to stubbornness between the parties and it harm
relationship for long run. So people should use principled negotiation which provides a more
efficient way of negotiation. Author gave four principles of negotiation. First
one is to:
Separate the people from the problem- Author said that people involved personally in negotiations with
emotions and forget about the interests. There main aim in the end is to win
the negotiation and in long run it harms relations. I experienced it in my negotiation activities- it happens generally that
people take it on their ego state and forget about outcome instead they start playing
the blaming game. So it is very important to learn from this principle that one
should come up with the result which have both interests. Moreover people
should understand other feelings & emotions and should see their interests
as well. And most importantly parties should communicate effectively. Even
in my negotiation activity I had done the same mistake that I was busy in planning
my own responses while other party was speaking which I realized after reading
this principle that it is important to listen actively.
In “Getting Past no” it has
been said that if a party trying to play with you with powerful emotions other
one should “go to the balcony” means he should not react. Inspite
of striking back one should keep mental balance b keeping emotions away and should
view the situation practically by identifying the (BATNA). So my understanding
is that one should never make a decision on the spot rather should take time to
review the settlement.
CONTRAST- In “Getting to yes” – It has been said that one should
understand other emotions but in “Getting past no” it has been said that one
should understand the emotional tactics of other side and should not react.
Connect- Connect between the two is that to play on middle ground,
understand others interests and then see if they are genuine or not, if they are genuine consider them but if they
are playing emotionally on wrong grounds then follow” Go to balcony rule”
author said that good agreements should be focus on the interests of parties not
on their positions. Because if you decide it in terms of positions then one
party has to lose the battle. I believe that
people should discuss their interests to create a motivating environment and moreover
if they found that others are paying attention to their need as well they will
feel more comfort. One important thing that I have learned over my negotiation activity
is that people should keep a clear focus and should remain open for different offers
because sometimes they are adamant to the thing they have entered with. So it’s
important to bring the pros and cons on table to make other party feel that lot
of other options exist.
Connect- In “Getting
Past No” also it has been said that reframe the dispute in terms of interests
rather than positions. They also suggested the way to ask open-ended questions to
get clear opponent’s interests and if they resist, ask them “why
3) Thirdly author said that Generate variety of options before settling
on an agreement. In this obstacles to generate options for solving a
problem have been identified. In my
learning to solve the obstacles
people should sit and brainstorm their ideas to find all possible way of
solving the problems. They should first state the problem then analyse it, and
further should consider approaches and actions. Each party should try to give
proposals that are equally fair to the other side so that the other don’t feel
Past No” it has been asked to “build them a golden bridge” to pull
them from their position to an agreement. One should always understand opponent
logic and should not avoid intangible comforts such as identity and security.
Connect- Both says that options should be generated.
Ask other party for their ideas and productive
criticism. Both the books believe that at times third party is a better
option because offer coming from the opponent party is sometimes unacceptable
but the same offer coming from third party is understandable.
4) Fourth agreement should be based on objective criteria- The parties should
use objective criteria to resolve their differences when interests are directly opposed. In objective criteria parties
should agree which criteria is best for both of them as it should be both genuine
and concrete. There are three points
to keep in mind when using objective criteria. First ask for the reasoning
behind the other party’s suggestions. Second, each party must keep an open mind.
Third, negotiators must never give in to pressure, threats, or bribes.
understanding from “Getting to Yes” is when the other party Is more powerful than
a weaker party should not give the bottom line and instead the weaker party
should concentrate on consider their best alternative to a negotiated agreement
(BATNA). Because negotiation should produce something better than the results one
can obtain without negotiating. I found
that before learning BATNA concept we were simply negotiating blindly and after
learning it helped me in negotiating with a powerful person and it also helped
me in raising the minimum bar.
But in “Getting Past No” says that power should be used to bring
opponent in to senses. The aim is to tell them that agreement is the best
option for them and keep asking them what you will do if agreement does not
happen. Give them a reality check that what they are losing.
Connect- In “Getting to Yes” it is more
tilted towards the helping the weaker party that how they should do negotiation
and what to reveal and what not. It is basically helping in making weaker party
strong in points while in “Getting Past
No” it has been said how to handle stubborn party; how to show them reality and
how one should defuse their tricks.
In conclusion when the party don’t use
principled negotiation and makes personal attacks to maximize their advantages
other party should not counter attack in respond to positional bargaining. Further
when parties use immoral tricks to gain an advantage in negotiations; others
should avoid it and should put all the claims in writing. The principled
negotiator should identify the positional pressure tactics when parties ask to take
the offer or leave it. The principled party should decline to the tricks or should
avoid accepting finality of the offer, instead keep trying with options.
As, the goal of
negotiations is not to dominate them, nor to destroy the opponent. The goal is
to win parties so that they become long term partners and help in solving a
problem together by reaching a consensus having both party interests.