Harvard Concept (Fisher and Urgy)

acquire to Yes (also c wholeed the Harvard concept) describes a mode called scrupulous duologue to reach an agree workforcet whose success is judged by terce criteria 1. It should produce a heady system if agreement is possible. 2. It should be efficient. 3. It should remediate or at least non damage the relationship among the parties. The authors argue that their method poop be used in close any dialogue. Issues atomic number 18 decided upon by their merits and the goal is a win-win smirch for both sides. Below is a summary of some of the key concepts from the book.The quadruplet locomote of a principled negotiation ar 1. Separate the multitude from the trouble 2. Focus on amuses, not positions 3. Invent options for mutual exculpate 4. Insist on development design criteria In principled negotiations, negotiators ar encouraged to take the purview that all the participants are problem solvers preferably than adversaries. The authors recommend that the goal s hould be to reach an out roll in the hay efficiently and amicably. The step house be described in more than detail as follows. Step 1 Separate the people from the problem All negotiations drive people and people are not perfect.We check emotions, our own interests and goals and we play to see the world from our point of view. We also are not constantly the trump out communicators many of us are not good enumerateeners. Getting to YES outlines a number of tools for dealing with the problems of perception, emotion and communication. However, the authors stress that separating people from problems is the best option. The keys to prevention are building a working relationship and veneer the problem, not the people. Think of the people you negotiate with on a unremitting basis.Generally, the better we slam someone, the easier it is to face a negotiation together. We tend to view people we dont know with more suspicion just what is Bob up to? Take time to get to know the so me other(a) party forward the negotiation begins. Think of the negotiation as a means to puzzle out a problem and the people on the other side as partners helping to find a solution. Ideally both parties will come out of a negotiation feeling they arrive at a unclouded agreement from which both sides can benefit. If the negotiation feels like a power of you versus them, the authors suggest a couple of options1. Raise the issue with the other side explicitlyLets look together at the problem of how to satisfy our collective interests. 2. amaze on the same side of the table. Try to structure the negotiation as a side-by-side activity in which the two of you with your diametric interests and perceptions, and your ablaze involvement jointly face a common task. Step 2 Focus on Interests, Not Positions The authors use a simple practice to explain the difference between interests and positions Two men are quarrelling in a library. One wants the window broadcast and the other wan ts it closed. . Enter the librarian.She asks one wherefore he wants the window open To get some fresh personal credit line his interest. She asks the other why he wants it closed To avoid a draft his interest. after thinking a moment, she opens wide a window in the next room, bringing in fresh air without a draft. The interests of the two men are the desire for fresh air and the desire to avoid a draft. The mens positions are to have the window open(a) or closed. The authors secernate we guide to focus, not on whether the window in their room is opened or closed, but on how we can meet both the need for fresh air and the need to avoid a draft.More lots than not, by focusing on interests, a creative solution can be found. In this little example, each man has one interest but in most negotiations, each party will have many interests and these interests will likely be different than yours. Its important to give-up the ghost your interests to the other party. Dont assume they h ave 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 identify and attend all the interests is a critical step in the mathematical operation. Step 3 Invent Options for Mutual GainThe authors feel that a common problem with many negotiations is there are too few options to choose from. undersize or no time is spent creating options. This, they feel, is a mistake. there are four steps to generating options 1. Separate inventing from deciding. Like in any cogitate session, dont judge the ideas people bring forward, just get them on the board. 2. stretch out the options on the table rather than look for a single answer. call back the men at the library? The only option they saw was possible action or closing the window in the room they were both sitting in.In fact, there are many options borrow a sweater, open a window in another room, move to a different spot, etc. 3. Search for mutual ga in. In a negotiation, both sides can be worse off and both sides can gain. Principled negotiations are not about I win and you lose. 4. Invent counselings of making the other partys decisions easy. Since a successful negotiation requires both parties to agree, start out it easy for the other side to choose. This is where putting yourself in the other persons garb can be very valuable. What might prevent Bob from agreeing? crapper you do anything to change those things? Step 4 Insist on victimisation object lens Criteria Principled negotiations are not battles of will. There is no winner and you dont need to push your position until the other backs down. The goal is to produce wise agreements amicably and efficiently. Use of accusatory criteria helps remove the emotion from the treatment and allows both parties to use sympathy and logic. You may have to develop objective criteria and there are a number of ways that can be done, from traditional practices, to market value to what a court would decide.Objective criteria need to be independent of each sides will. Once objective criteria have been authentic, they need to be discussed with the other side. The authors provide some guidelines 1. Frame each issue as a joint search for objective criteria. 2. Use reason and be open to reason as to which standards are most tolerate and how they should be applied. 3. Never yield to pressure, only to principle. Common Challenges adjacent these steps should lead you to a successful outcome, but it isnt always that easy.The authors wherefore go on to address three types of common challenges negotiators face. sometimes the other party is more powerful than you The most any method of negotiation can do is to meet two objectives send-off, 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 satisfy your interests as hygienic as possible. To protect yours elf, develop and know your BATNA Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. The reason you negotiate is to produce something better than the firmnesss 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 crucial to know your BATNA and take time to make sure its as significant 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 promising ideas and convert them into practical alternatives.3. Select, tentatively, the one alternative that seems best Sometimes the other party just wont play In a principled negotiation, you dont want to play games with the other party and you dont want them playing games with you. The authors barrack three approaches to getting things back on track in this placement 1. Concentrate on the merits talk ab out interests, options and criteria 2. Focus on what the other party may do try and identify the other partys interests and the principles cardinal their position.3. Focus on what a third party can do bring in a third party to assist if steps 1 and 2 arent successful Sometimes the other party uses sleazy tricks You may encounter a party who wont shy away 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 pr actice. 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 deserve and of being decent. You can have both.