Harvard Concept (Fisher and Urgy)

Getting to Yes (also called the Harvard concept) describes a rule called scrupulous talks to reach an agree workforcet whose getner is judged by deuce-ace criteria 1. It should defecate a wise correspondence if commensurateness is possible. 2. It should be efficient. 3. It should improve or at least(prenominal) non damage the kind amid the parties. The authors argue that their method lav be used in virtually whatever duologue. Issues atomic number 18 learnd upon by their merits and the design is a win-win stance for two sides. under is a summary of some of the account concepts from the book.The four st standard pres reals of a scrupulous negotiation be 1. distinguish the spate from the paradox 2. heighten on interests, not positions 3. constitute options for mutual gain 4. swear on using objective criteria In high-principled negotiations, negotiators argon encouraged to make up the view that all the participants are business solvers rather than adve rsaries. The authors recommend that the goal should be to reach an outcome efficiently and amicably. The step can be described in to a greater extent detail as follows. step 1 Separate the hatful from the conundrum All negotiations involve hoi polloi and community are not perfect.We contain emotions, our consume interests and goals and we tend to see the world from our depict of view. We also are not ever so the best communicators some(prenominal) of us are not good distinguisheners. Getting to YES outlines a number of tools for transaction with the problems of perception, emotion and communication. However, the authors show that separating people from problems is the best option. The keys to prevention are building a working relationship and facing the problem, not the people. Think of the people you negotiate with on a continuous basis.Generally, the mend we hunch some peerless, the easier it is to face a negotiation to recoverher. We tend to view people we dont accredit with more suspicion practiced what is Bob up to? Take quantify to get to know the new(prenominal) company before the negotiation begins. Think of the negotiation as a means to work out a problem and the people on the separate side as partners support to find a solution. Ideally both parties will come out of a negotiation scenting they wee a fair agreement from which both sides can benefit. If the negotiation feels like a situation of you versus them, the authors suggest a couple of options1. salary increase the bulge with the some opposite side explicitlyLets appear together at the problem of how to fit our collective interests. 2. Sit on the identical side of the table. Try to organise the negotiation as a side-by-side activeness in which the two of you with your different interests and perceptions, and your excited involvement jointly face a parkland task. Step 2 revolve about on Interests, Not Positions The authors use a simple example to explain th e difference of opinion between interests and positions Two men are quarrelling in a library. One wants the window consecrate and the new(prenominal) wants it closed. . Enter the librarian.She asks one why he wants the window afford To get some invigorated air his interest. She asks the opposite why he wants it closed To over mould a draft his interest. After thinking a moment, she opens wide a window in the next means, bringing in fresh air without a draft. The interests of the two men are the desire for fresh air and the desire to subjugate a draft. The mens room positions are to have the window capable or closed. The authors say we fill to focus, not on whether the window in their room is opened or closed, but on how we can proper both the need for fresh air and the need to avoid a draft.More often than not, by focusing on interests, a notional solution can be found. In this little example, each man has one interest but in average about negotiations, each troupe will have many a(prenominal) interests and these interests will likely be different than yours. Its important to communicate your interests to the other(a)(a) party. Dont assume they have the same interests as you or that they know what your interests are. Dont assume you know what interests the other party has. Discussion to name and understand all the interests is a slender step in the branch. Step 3 Invent Options for Mutual GainThe authors feel that a common problem with many negotiations is in that respect are too a couple of(prenominal) options to choose from. Little or no time is spent creating options. This, they feel, is a mistake. at that place are four steps to generating options 1. Separate inventing from deciding. Like in any think session, dont judge the ideas people bring forward, just get them on the board. 2. Broaden the options on the table rather than look for a single answer. Remember the men at the library? The only option they see was opening or clo sing the window in the room they were both sit down in.In fact, in that respect are many options borrow a sweater, open a window in another room, take up to a different spot, etc. 3. hunt club for mutual gain. In a negotiation, both sides can be worse slay and both sides can gain. Principled negotiations are not about I win and you lose. 4. Invent ship look of making the other partys decisions easy. Since a favored negotiation requires both parties to agree, make it easy for the other side to choose. This is where putting yourself in the other persons shoes can be in truth valuable. What might prevent Bob from agreeing? gouge you do anything to change those things? Step 4 Insist on Using accusive Criteria Principled negotiations are not battles of will. thither is no winner and you dont need to push button your position until the other backs down. The goal is to acquire wise agreements amicably and efficiently. role of objective criteria helps remove the emotion from the word and allows both parties to use reason and logic. You may have to develop objective criteria and there are a number of ways that can be done, from traditional practices, to food market value to what a court would decide.Objective criteria need to be self-sufficient of each sides will. Once objective criteria have been developed, they need to be discussed with the other side. The authors lead some guidelines 1. Frame each issue as a joint look for for objective criteria. 2. Use reason and be open to reason as to which standards are more or less appropriate and how they should be applied. 3. Never tax return to pressure, only to principle. Common Challenges succeeding(a) these steps should lead you to a successful outcome, but it isnt always that easy.The authors then go on to address three types of common challenges negotiators face. Sometimes the other party is more powerful than you The just about any method of negotiation can do is to meet two objectives first, to protect you against making an agreement you should reject and second, to help you make the most of the assets you do have so that any agreement you reach will accomplish your interests as well as possible. To protect yourself, develop and know your BATNA Best resource to a Negotiated Agreement. The reason you negotiate is to produce something punter than the numbers you can obtain without negotiating. The result you can obtain without negotiating is your BATNA. The better your BATNA, the greater your power so its essential to know your BATNA and take time to make sure its as strong as it could be. The same will hold true for the other party. There are three steps to developing your BATNA 1. Invent a list of actions you might take if no agreement is reached 2. Improve some of the more undimmed ideas and convert them into practical alternate(a)s.3. Select, tentatively, the one alternative that seems best Sometimes the other party just wont play In a principled negotiation, yo u dont want to play games with the other party and you dont want them playing games with you. The authors support three onward motiones to getting things back on track in this situation 1. focus on on the merits talk about interests, options and criteria 2. Focus on what the other party may do try and identify the other partys interests and the principles underlying their position.3. Focus on what a 3rd party can do bring in a third party to assist if steps 1 and 2 arent successful Sometimes the other party uses dirty tricks You may match a party who wont shy absent from using dirty tricks. The process for dealing with this type of tactic is to follow the process for principled negotiations 1. Separate the people from the problem 2. Focus on interests not positions 3. Invent options for mutual gain 4. Insist on using objective criteria 5. If all else fails, turn to your BATNA and walk outThe authors close with three points 1. You knew it all the time. Much of what goes into a principled negotiation is common sense. The authors have developed an understandable framework to share the approach with others. 2. Learn from doing. You wont become a better negotiator unless you get out there and practice. 3. Winning The first thing you are trying to win is a better way to negotiate a way that avoids your having to choose between the satisfactions of getting what you merit and of being decent. You can have both.