Getting To Yes Negotiating An Agreement Without Giving In By Roger Fisher
Positive communication is a much more effective way to get yes than to blame and criticize. Instead of speaking for your group, you speak only for yourself. For example, if she says to an employee, “Everyone on the team feels like you`re not pulling your weight” on an employee, she`ll probably divert attention from your message because she`s going to wonder who talked about her and what they said. Instead, talk about what you have personally observed and express your concern: “Your recent work is lagging behind your high level of performance. Is there anything that prevents you from doing your best? The principles-based method of negotiation was developed in Harvard`s program on the negotiation of Fisher, Ury and Patton.  Its aim is to reach an agreement without compromising trade relations.  The method is based on five proposals: Getting to Yes proposes a concise and gradually proven strategy for concluding mutually acceptable agreements in all conflicts, be they parents and children, neighbours, bosses and employees, clients or businesses, tenants or diplomats. Based on the work of the Harvard Negotiation Project, a group that continually deals with all levels of negotiation and conflict resolution, from the inside to the international through business, Getting to Yes says how you: Thank you for everything you`ve done – and share it so openly. I am not sure there is a name for that, but I use a technique that seems very useful when I help groups negotiate agreements, that is, to start testing simple agreements, and then gradually move towards more ambitious agreements. It could be with “So I`ve heard that we all believe we`re going to solve this problem. Is that right? I think it is helpful because it indicates that we agree on some points, that we are making progress and that we are moving towards a solution.
It is also useful because it helps me to understand where the divergence and convergence is, so that I can better concentrate the negotiations. The path to Yes offers a simple, universally applicable method for negotiating personal and professional disputes, without getting caught and without getting angry. Fisher, R., Ury, W. and Patton, B. (1991), Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In, 2nd ed., Houghton Mifflin. In negotiations, the parties must resist the urge to constantly compromise for fear of losing the negotiations altogether. Such compromises may allow for a shorter negotiation, but also leave the main party with an agreement that has not fully benefited them. The definition of a “lower line” may protect the negotiator`s final offer, but it may limit the ability to learn from the negotiations and exclude any new negotiations that could eventually result in a better benefit to all parties involved. When considering final decisions, each party can take a step backwards and consider all possible alternatives to the current offer. An example in the book describes a house on the market: if the house was not sold, one should compare with the possibility of selling the house to make sure that the best decision is made.  As early as 1965, Walton and McKersies clearly articulated the study of the theory of negotiation lab theory, which they called “integrative quarrels,” with tactics such as mutual understanding of the problem, exchange of information, mutual trust and the search for the best alternative.
Sounds familiar? The path to Yes did not recognize walton and McKersie`s book, although all the books I`ve read about collective bargaining do. If you can say yes, the phrase becomes be gentle on people and the problem. For example, Walton and McKersie cited Mr.