EVOLUTION OF NEGOTIATING STYLES The Next step in the road to grater effectiveness in negotiating is understanding the four basic

negotiating positions. It is fascinating to trace the development of negotiation and Negotiation Techniques as a field of study. With each stage us the mandate if what a negotiators primary role is. The Jungle Fighter This is certainly a remnant of the war years with this position the negotiating table is turned into a battlefield. Negotiators must know their weak points: their strengths and compare them with those of the opponents. The goal of each party is to exploit their advantage in order to win. These concepts are perhaps most artfully illustrated by John Ilich who in his book Power Negotiating defines the whole approach as the ability if the negotiator to motivate an opponent in a manner that is favorable tot he negotiators negotiating objectives Whenever this assumption of the situation is made then the strategies and tactics likely to be employed will include intimidation, maneuvers, trickery, deceit and power play. The Compromiser It does not really take long for Jungle-Fighters to realise that the highly competitive stance of fight or flight is nice for as long as one is always on top. And even if it were possible to always win all the time, it requires tremendous energy and resources to do so. In the end, one is never really sure weather it is worth it or not. Having said that, many jungle-fighters will stay that way until they are out away for good, simply because they would not entertain any possible changes for their lifestyle. The next stage after the Jungle-Fighter is one that at least recognises some interdependence between the parties involved. The Compromiser always comes up with a way to give and take. Dr. Chester comes up wit a way to Give and Take and The Negotiating Game inches his way through this position there is always a better deal for both parties. The role of the negotiator in this position is to package the deals and show the other party the necessity of movement towards a compromised position. The biggest contribution of this stage is perhaps the concept of leave room to negotiate

i.e., have an optimistic, realistic, and a fallback target. Your calculated movement from your optimistic aspiration to your fallback line will send a message across to the other party that you are willing to compromise. Gary Karrass, author of 'Negotiate to Close,' hits the nail right on the head by saying The path to the better deal for both parties is always asking for something in return. This way of negotiating is less hostile. And while in the end the negotiator can still only have his own needs in mind, credibility and goodwill are easier to maintain. The Problem-Solver This third stage, in the concepts related to approaching negotiation, is perhaps the real major breakthrough in providing a more meaningful answer to the question How do I Best Negotiate? Imagine for a moment that you and the other party on the opposite side are not negotiating but rather simply involved in a problem. Even such simple twist in Peoples mental framework can mean a totally different atmosphere of collaborative endeavor. Roger Fisher and William Ury of the Harvard Negotiation Project have brought this stage to final fruition in their book 'Getting to Yes.' The Key concepts in this approach to negotiating are summarised by Fisher and Ury in Table one. With this approach, mutual satisfaction for both parties is assured. It puts an end to the view of negotiation as a contest. It rather takes on what is there and how to bring about an agreed solution. Furthermore, a trained negotiator in this approach will find it easier to put any partys attempt on playing dirty out of negotiation. The Designer The Problem solving approach to negotiation would have been the ultimate thing had life really been truly easily translated to black or white, right or wrong. Problems and solutions. Very often the problem itself may not be clear-cut. It even becomes more complicated when the linear concept of a

problem as having a beginning and a fixed end is put aside. The problem then translates itself into a situation or condition which has to be resolved and put aside. When you really come down to it, many of the significant negotiations a person does in life is an ongoing partys interdependence As a way out, Edward de Bono in his book Conflicts introduces Designs. As the word connotes the goal is not to simply look back at what is already there but rather always to focus at what might be created. Instead of looking at a negotiation setting as conflict or a problem-solving situation it is viewed as a situation which needs a designed outcome. De Bono further explains it as: The main point about the design idiom is in that it is open-ended. We set out to achieve an outcome. At the beginning we do not know exactly what the outcome is going to be, though there is yet a strong sense of purpose. A mountaineer has a peak to climb but a dancer had energy which then calls forth the steps. While de Bono believes it is unlikely that many negotiators can bring forth a design talent (thus, he has introduced the concept of the third party designers) his concepts have opened up a whole new horizon of improving real negotiation out comes.