Posted on

Self Negotiation Strategy

Reflecting on my Negotiation Skills Abstract Negotiation is an everyday fact of life and it is bound to occur whenever two parties have differing opinions and they need to seek a middle ground. Devoid of communication lines, there can be no negotiation. Communication competence can be gauged using five cognitions.

These, in their order of strength, are: planning cognitions, consequence cognitions, reflection cognitions, and presence cognitions. Areas for improvement include not letting my sincerity and straightforwardness to impede my ability to bluff, being more open to making compromises, and shifting my focus from trying to aggressively make big wins as this alienates the other party, destroying relationships.

Additional areas for improvement include: honing the skills needed to read other people’s reactions to my communication and those skills that increase my ability to perceive what is happening in the process; working on my negotiating skills to enable me to negotiate in one-on-one discussions compared to group discussions; and to work on my patience as it is a very important in using leverage to win in negotiations. Reflecting on my Communication Skills

Negotiation is an everyday fact of life and it is bound to occur whenever two parties have differing opinions and they need to seek a middle ground. Devoid of communication lines, there can be no negotiation. Therefore, this rule is essential. Lines of communication are the life-blood of a negotiation. Master negotiators foster their communication lines, and where lines are weak, they seek to develop new ones. Developing rapport with the other party eases the stress of negotiating and improves the likelihood of a successful outcome.

This is especially crucial in instances where the parties will have a long-term relationship after negotiations closure (Noble, 2001). This essay seeks to reflect on my own negotiation style from which I will develop a plan to improve my personal negotiation skills based on the type of negotiator that I am. My Communication Competence Planning Cognitions. This is cognition to expect, practice and monitor themes of conversation. It involves, among other things, the anticipation of the audience and planning what will be said in advance. This is my strongest cognition. Consequence Cognitions.

This gauges the awareness of the negotiator of the outcomes of a communication performance by, among others, thinking about how others might construe what has been said and understanding the impact of the communication on others, among other things. This ranks second in my cognitions. Reflection Cognitions. This gauges the tendency for the negotiator to cast a retrospective glance at a communication performance with the aim of improving one’s self presentation. I involves the act of reflecting on what was said, the past performance, what could have been said, among other things.

This cognition ranks third for me. Modeling Cognitions. This gauges the respondent’s cognizance of contextual variables that supply information on how to interact with the other party by, among others, “sizing up” the environment, and attending to how other people are reacting and responding. This cognition ranks as the second weakest for me. Presence Cognitions. This is the cognizance of the way the other party is reacting to a conversation and it involves, among other things, knowing when to recognize others negative reactions or resistance and change the subject.

This is my weakest cognition. Implications of My Communications Competence on My negotiation Skills Planning Cognitions. This ability helps me to be able to anticipate the characters that I am bound to encounter in the negotiation process. Personally, I like to be sincere in my negotiations. I tend to be apathetic in arguments and I push for my convictions, then putting the negotiation process behind me once it is over. Additionally, I love to hog power and to foster conflict; I believe conflict is healthy.

This cognition offers a mixed bag for me: Some of These traits are very useful when it comes to negotiating, but some of them serve to cripple the process. The fact that that I plan ahead for the issues of discussion and how to present my convictions to the other party serves to give me a negotiating advantage (Hufford, 1999). I maintain sincerity in my negotiations, and while this can be beneficial, it can also serve to weaken my portfolio of tactics that I can employ in the negotiation. Sincerity is important so as to maintain credibility during and after negotiations.

However, being overly sincere can limit one’s ability to subdue disadvantageous verbal and non-verbal cues, and where befitting, to send misleading cues so as to support a bluff. The ability to maintain levelheadedness in the negotiation is a big plus for me as a negotiator since emotions do not serve to cloud my involvement in the negotiation process (Hufford, 1999; Clarke, 1998). Consequence Cognitions. Generally, I do not have a strong preference for one-on-one discussions compared to group discussions.

I am mildly empathetic, and sharing of power does not auger well with me: I see it as a loss of advantage that would otherwise be presented to me during negotiations if I had the power all to myself. The awareness of the consequences of a negotiation is important for me. When it comes to winning, I like to do it big. This aggressive nature of negotiation style, while it may win in particular cases, destroys the future willingness for the other party to negotiate with me on other matters. Self-confidence and self-assertiveness, but without unnecessary aggressiveness, are desirable negotiating traits (Hufford, 1999; Clarke, 1998).

Reflection Cognitions. I love clear rules during negotiations and where possible, I find precedents to be useful in guiding the negotiation process. The reflecting upon a communication performance, with the objective being to improve one’s self presentation, makes me a better negotiator. I am incapable of lying effectively, but my good sense of humor is a great asset that compensates for my inability to lie by helping to break the ice. I am not much against criticism (depending on how it is framed), but ceding ground by giving up power is never an option.

This resistance to conceding ground may be counterproductive as it hinders my ability to compromise (Hufford, 1999). Modeling Cognitions. Gauging contextual variables to supply information on how to interact with the other party is important in negotiations so as to determine the offers and counteroffers that you can throw at the other party. This cognition ranks as the second weakest for me. I do not believe in going to extreme lengths to gain an insight into the other party and I do not like slow negotiations. Additionally, I face no difficulties in conveying my convictions and I do not hold grudges.

These attributes, save for my impatience during negotiations and handicap in sizing up the other party, mostly help me to become an efficient negotiator. The ability to rapidly measure the impact of variations and counter-proposals on the other party’s interests is crucial, as is patience and flexibility (Clarke, 1998). Presence Cognitions. Having the cognizance of the way the other party is reacting to a conversation is crucial in a negotiation. This is my weakest cognition. I do care how people perceive me and I am never about winning by slight margins.

I do not like to waste time persuading others and I go for the jugular so as to guarantee quick wins, Additionally, I can hardly call myself a principled person. The ability to perceive the other parties’ speech and body signals during negotiations and interpret them appropriately is a desirable trait in a negotiator (Clarke, 1998). Areas for Improvement While my sincerity and straightforwardness is an asset, the fact that I am incapable of effectively deploying smoke screens for my opponents means that I may not be reaping the maximum benefits from my negotiations as I cannot raise my standing using bluffs.

Additionally, it would be desirable for me to cede some ground when negotiating. This includes letting go of some of the power I may hold so as to make the other party to be able to participate in the process in a role that is not overly disadvantaged as this may leave them disgruntled and jeopardize the likelihood of meaningful future negotiations on other issues (Cohen, n. d. ). My emphasis on winning big and clobbering the opponent needs to be replaced with a less aggressive approach where I seek to be content with just winning.

One of the most common misstep that people make in negotiation is to take it as warfare or as a zero-sum game. This is not good as it is a fact that negotiations are highly likely to happen between the same people over and over about various issues. It is prudent to consider each negotiation as a part of an ongoing relationship (Cohen, n. d. ). It is also good to hone the skills needed to read other people’s reactions to my communication and those skills that increase my ability to perceive what is happening in the process.

This ability helps to correctly gauge when to cede ground, when you are gaining an upper hand, and when the negotiations are over (Conflict Resolution Network, n. d. ). I should also work on my negotiating skills to enable me to negotiate in one-on-one discussions compared to group discussions. Group discussions usually means negotiations within negotiations, since the members of each group have to negotiate an intra-consensus prior to giving a response to the other side.

If every single member of every group has to put in their point of view before a response to a proposal can be formulated, the process becomes slow and tedious. Despite the number of people involved in a negotiation, important decisions are usually made when no more than two people are involved (Noble, 2001). It is also necessary to work on my patience as it is a very important in using leverage to win in negotiations. The value of leverage is hinged on factors such as necessity, desire, competition, and time.

While hastening negotiations can serve to increase the punch that your leverage point holds, having the patience for holding out and dragging the negotiations may serve to soften the leverage points that the other party has (Noble, 2001). Conclusion Communication competence can be gauged using five cognitions. These, in their order of strength, are: planning cognitions, which is the cognition to expect, practice and monitor themes of conversation; consequence cognitions, which gauge the awareness of the negotiator of the outcomes of a negotiation; reflection cognitions, which gauges the tendency for the egotiator to cast a retrospective glance at a communication performance with the aim of improving one’s self presentation; modeling cognitions which gauges the respondent’s cognizance of contextual variables that supply information on how to interact with the other party; and presence cognitions, which is the cognizance of the way the other party is reacting to a conversation.

Areas for improvement include not letting my sincerity and straight forwardness to impede my ability to bluff, being more open to making compromises, and shifting my focus from trying to aggressively make big wins as this alienates the other party, destroying relationships.

Additional areas for improvement include: honing the skills needed to read other people’s reactions to my communication and those skills that increase my ability to perceive what is happening in the process; working on my negotiating skills to enable me to negotiate in one-on-one discussions compared to group discussions; and to work on my patience as it is a very important in using leverage to win in negotiations. References Clarke, R. (1998). Fundamentals of Negotiation. Retrieved August 30, 2011 from http://www. rogerclarke. com/SOS/FundasNeg. html Cohen, S. (n. d. ).

Fundamentals of Negotiation. Retrieved August 30, 2011 from http://www. negotiationskills. com/qafund. php Conflict Resolution Network. (n. d. ). CR Kit. Retrieved August 30, 2011 from http://www. crnhq. org/pages. php? pID=12#skill_3 Hufford, D. L. (1999). Fundamentals of Negotiation. Retrieved August 30, 2011 from http://www. usafp. org/Fac_Dev/Leadership_Management/ Negotiation%20Skills/Negotiation-Handout. htm Noble, T. (2001). Improving Negotiation Skills: Rules for Master Negotiators. Retrieved August 30, 2011 from http://library. findlaw. com/2001/Jan/1/130785. html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.