Negotiation: Competitive Vs Problem Solving Interest-Based Approach

Characteristics of Positional Bargaining Approach

Discuss about the United Approach to Negotiation.

Negotiation is considered as the process of making the joint decisions at the time when parties related to the negotiation have different and opposite preferences. Negotiation is considered as the special significance in context of conflicts, whether such conflict arise between the union and management of the organization or between the countries. In these situations, negotiations are required for the purpose of resolving the conflict between the parties. Generally, conflicts and difference in opinions are arise in the work settings between the parties such as matters related to the wages, performance evaluation, working conditions, job assignments, schedules related to the work, etc (Management study HQ, n.d.).

It must be noted that any type of negotiation mainly focus on two types of goals that are substance and relationships. Conclusion of agreement related to the wage increases can be considered as achievement of the substance goal, and the relationship goals deals with the results which considered how well parties related to the negotiations are able to work well with each other, once the process related to the negotiation is completed. 

The main aim of this paper is to conduct research on two approaches related to negotiation that are competitive positional-based negotiation and problem solving interest based negotiation.

Structure of this report includes characteristics related to both the approaches, assumption related to the each approach, risk related to the each approach, and impact on relationships of the each approach. Lastly, brief conclusion is written for concluding the important facts of this paper.

The basic form of the negotiation includes two different strategies that are advocate’s approach and the win-win negotiators approach. From these two approaches, we also have two additional strategies that are interest based bargaining which is also known as integrative, or cooperative bargaining, and second is the positional bargaining which is also known as the distributive or competitive bargaining (management study HQ, n.d.).

Positional bargaining is considered as that negotiation approach which mainly based on the fixed idea. In other words, this is the strategy which holds the position and considers the exact requirement of the person and arguing for such requirement instead of any underlying interests. Positional bargaining is the first choice of the people while entering into the negotiation (Tremblay, 2016). Following are the most important characteristics of the positional bargaining approach:

• Each side of the party related to the negotiation introduces their own solution.
• Each side of the party is left to assume which problem related to the solution from the other side is intended to solve.
• Each side of the party marital to the solution which is suggested by the parties before any discussion is held between the parties.
• Positions of the parties are traded and packaged.
• Parties also suggest the alternative positions on occasional basis.
• Appropriate time is spent by the parties for the purpose of discovering what is important for the other side (grebski, 2016).

Interest based bargaining is also known as the integrative bargaining and it is considered as the negotiation approach under which collaboration is made by the parties for the purpose of finding the win-win solution related to their disputes. This strategy mainly focuses on developing the agreement which are mutually beneficial for the parties and based on the interest of the disputants. Interest of the parties includes the needs, desires, concerns, and fears of the both side parties. These are the most important reasons because of which parties involved in the disputes. Under this approach, interest of the parties is combined for the purpose of creating the joint value or increase the pie. This approach is only possible in those situations when different and multiple issues are involved in the negotiation process. This is because the parties related to the dispute must be able to make trade-offs in context of the issues for the purpose of satisfying both the parties (Spangler, 2003).

Characteristics of Interest Based Bargaining Approach

This approach is considered as important approach because it usually provides more satisfactory results to the involved parties as compared to positional bargaining approach. As stated above, positional bargaining approach is based on the fixed positions and mainly focuses on the compromise and not on mutual agreement at all. Generally, positional bargaining fails to efficiently satisfy the true interest of the disputants. Compromises simply split the difference between the positions holds by the parties, and provide each side half satisfaction of the outcome they required. On the other side, interest based bargaining potentially provide every person whatever they required. There is usually number of interests behind one position, and in case parties related to the negotiation identifying these interests then they will definitely enhance their ability to ensure the win-win situations (Pasquier, et. al. 2007).

The difference between the two approaches is stated below:

Positional bargaining:

Following are the basic assumptions related to the positional bargaining:

• In this approach negotiation between the parties is controlled by the egocentric self-interest of the parties.
• In this underlying motivation between the parties is competitive in nature.
• Very few resources are available under this approach.
• This negotiation does not affect the future of the parties involved in the dispute.
• The main purpose under this approach in context of parties is to win.
• This negotiation approach mainly considered as the game of winning and loose (morgan, 2006).

Interest based bargaining:

Following are the basic assumptions related to the Interest based bargaining:

• The most important assumption related to this approach is conciliatory and cooperative.
• In this approach parties related to the dispute are directed to share information with each other (Benzoni, et. al. 2002).
• The spirit of this approach is both the parties help each other in succeed.
• In this approach parties automatically assumes that mutual gain is possible.
• Under this approach both the parties related to the dispute are optimistic in nature (Ventello, n.d.).

Positional bargaining:

Sometimes, this approach also creates issues, as whenever negotiations extend, the parties involved in the negotiations committed more towards their positions, and defend themselves on continuous basis. A strong commitment of the parties towards their position generally results in the lack of attention of both the parties in the underlying interests. Therefore, any agreement that is concluded between the parties reflect the mechanical splitting in context of difference between the final positions instead of the solution that is carefully drafted by the parties for the purpose of fulfilling the parties legitimate interest (Rahwan, et. al., 2004).

Therefore, this strategy is considered as the less constructive and less efficient for the negotiation purpose. This strategy usually does not result in the win-win outcome and maximum times develop bad feeling between the negotiators. In other words, this approach develops the feelings of competition between the parties related to the negotiation, and this result in the unsatisfied feeling in the one side party related to the negotiation. There are number of decision in context of which this strategy does not work and proves insufficient. It can be said that the more strong opening position of the parties take more time in reaching the negotiation (Maxwell, n.d.).

Interest based bargaining:

The biggest issue related to this approach is the dangerous expectations, which means this approach create unnecessary and dangerous expectations in the minds of the parties, which stated that all the problems will be resolved and all the interest of the parties will be addressed. This can sharply contrast with the expectations in terms of the traditional bargaining under which participants clearly knows that they are not able to achieve all or even maximum number of their goals in the single process of the negotiation (Barret, 2015). This approach also states the attractive nick name of “win-win bargaining” which also create assumption in the mind of people that all their expectation will be fulfilled. It reflects the people that there are mutual and shared interest which is hold by both labor and management and all their interest can be met by using this approach, even in case when interest of the parties are not mutual but this process stated that they are able to the mutual satisfaction.

Comparison between the two approaches

Another issue related to this approach is time consumption, which means this process is time consuming and cannot deals with those situations which are urgent. This approach takes more time for preparing the process as compared to the positional bargaining, especially in context of the data collection and the training need, and it also takes longer time for the purpose of negotiating the issue at the one table (Fisher & ury, 1983).

Positional bargaining:

This approach is used at the time when one party rise the dispute and other party gives counter argument related to that issue and such argument is given in his or her own favor. This approach raises the feeling of superior ship in the mind of the parties and generally results in the conflict. In context of this approach, parties clearly know that consideration of all the underlying interest is not possible, and sometimes it results in counterproductive. Impact of this approach on the relationships is negative because this approach develops the feeling of the competition and creates the each party other party’s competitor (Spangler, 2003).

Interest based bargaining:

On the other hand, this approach is specific in nature for each party and it creates healthy relationship between the parties related to the dispute because in this parties mainly focus on the mutual solution. Impact of this approach on the relationships is positive because this approach does not develop any feeling of competition but it mainly focus on win-win concept (Rutgers, n.d.).

After considering the above facts, it can be said that Manager of United Beverages Pty. Ltd can use interest based approach for the purpose of undertaking the negotiations because it usually provides more satisfactory results to the involved parties as compared to positional bargaining approach. Positional bargaining approach is based on the fixed positions and mainly focuses on the compromise and not on mutual agreement at all (Leavy, 2015).

Conclusion:

Negotiations are required for the purpose of resolving the conflict between the parties. It must be noted that any type of negotiation mainly focus on two types of goals that are substance and relationships. Positional bargaining is the strategy which holds the position and considers the exact requirement of the person and arguing for such requirement instead of any underlying interests. Interest based bargaining is also known as the integrative bargaining and it is considered as the negotiation approach under which collaboration is made by the parties for the purpose of finding the win-win solution related to their disputes.

References:

Blaney. Interest based bargaining. Available at: https://www.blaney.com/files/Interest-Based-Bargaining.pdf. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Barret, J. (2015). The Interest-Based Bargaining Story at the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. Negotiation Journal, Vol. 31 (4). pp 431-435.

Benzoni, K. et. al. (2002). Barriers to Resolution in Ideologically Based Negotiations: The Role of Values and Institutions. Academy of Management review, Vol. 27(1).

Fisher, R. & Ury, W. (1983). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, (New York: Penguin Books.

Grebski, J. (2016). The Art of Negotiation, Positional vs Interest Based Bargaining. Available at: https://medium.com/swarm-nyc/the-art-of-negotiation-positional-vs-interest-based-bargaining-c1931ce9ab4b. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Leavy, Z. (2015). Interest-Based Bargainings' Impact on Collective Bargaining Outcomes. Available at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1044&context=lrc_paper_series. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Management Study HQ. What is Negotiation?. Available at: https://www.managementstudyhq.com/strategies-of-negotiation.html. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Maxwell. Interest-Based Negotiation. Available at: https://www.maxwell.syr.edu/uploadedFiles/parcc/cmc/Interested-Based%20Negotiation%20NK.pdf. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Morgan, N. (2006). Implementing mutual gains (interest-based) collective bargaining. Available at: https://www.morganbrown.com/docs/the%20general%20concepts%20surrounding%20interest%20based%20bargaining.pdf. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Rutgers. Can Interest-Based Negotiations Improve Your Relationships?. Available at: https://smlr.rutgers.edu/content/can-interest-based-negotiations-improve-your-relationships. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Spangler, B. (2003). Integrative or Interest-Based Bargaining. Available at: https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/interest-based_bargaining. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Spangler, B. (2003). Positional bargaining. Available at: https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/positional_bargaining. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Tremblay, J. (2016). From Principled Negotiation to Interest-based Bargaining. Universal Journal of Industrial and Business Management, Vol. 4(2): 71-79.

Ventello, G. The Negotiator. Available at: https://mydigimag.rrd.com/publication/?i=126939&article_id=1181504&view=articleBrowser&ver=html5#{%22issue_id%22:126939,%22view%22:%22articleBrowser%22,%22article_id%22:%221181504%22}. Accessed on 5^th June 2018.

Rahwan, I., et. al., (2004). Argumentation-based negotiation. The Knowledge Engineering Review, Vol.18 (4), 343-375.

Pasquier, P. et. al. (2007). An empirical study of interest-based negotiation. Proceedings of the ninth international conference on Electronic commerce, 339 – 348.