Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Boeken > Getting to Yes > Flashcards

Getting to Yes Flashcards

1
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - three criteria
A
  1. Negotiations shoud produce a wise agreement, if agreement is possible
    - it meets the legitimate interests of each side to the extent possible
    - it resolves conflicting interests fairly
    - it is durable
    - it takes community interests into account
  2. It should be efficient
  3. It should improve or at least not damage the relationship between the parties (amicably)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 1. arguing over positions produces unwise outcomes
A

The more attention is paid to positions, the less attention is devoted to meeting the underlying concerns and legitimate interests of the parties

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 2. arguing over positions is inefficient
A

Bargaining over positions creates incentives that stall settlement (dragging feet, threatening to walk out, stonewalling), with risk that no agreement is reached at all

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 3. arguing over positions endangers an ongoing relationship
A

The task of jointly devising an acceptable solution becomes a battle

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 4. when there are many parties, positional bargaining is even worse
A

Several parties may sit at the table, while each side may have constituents, higher-ups, boards of directors or committees

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 5. being nice is no answer
A

A soft negotiation game tends to be efficient, but it may not be a wise one. A woman sells her hair to buy her husband a watchchain, while the husband sells its watch to buy the wife beautiful combs. Against a hard bargainer the process will produce an agreement, although it may not be a wise one, you will probably lose your shirt.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 6. there is an alternative - at what two levels does the game of negotiations takes place?
A
  1. At one level negotiation addresses the substance
  2. At another level it focuses on the procedure for dealing with the substance - a game about a game; you structure the rules of the game you are playing
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 6. there is an alternative - what are the four basic points of principled negotiation?
A
  1. People - separate the people from the problem
  2. Interests - focus on interests, not positions
  3. Options - invent multiple options looking for mutual gains before deciding what to do
  4. Criteria - insist that the result be based on some objective standard
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 6. there is an alternative - are people objective?
A

We are creatures of strong emotions who often have radically different positions and have difficulty communicating clearly

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 6. there is an alternative - focus on interests, not positions
A

A negotiation position often obscures what you really want. Compromising between positions is not likely to produce an agreement that will effectively take care of the human needs that led people to adopt those positions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 6. there is an alternative - what are the three stages of principled negotiation?
A

Analysis, planning and discussion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q
  1. Don’t bargain over positions - 6. there is an alternative - what two kinds of interests does every negotiation have?
A

In the substance and in the relationship - sometimes the ongoing relationship is more important than the outcome of a particular negotiation - positional bargaining puts relationship and substance in conflict

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem
A

2 cases - What is going on in these cases?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 1. negotiators are people first
A

You are dealing with human beings - they have emotions, deeply held values, different backgrounds and viewpoints. They are prone to cognitive biases, partisan perceptions, blind spots and leaps of illogic. This human aspect of negotiations can be either helpful or disastrous

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 2. every negotiator has two kinds of interests: in the substance and in the relationship
A

Most negotiations take place in the context of an ongoing relationship where it is import to carry on each negotiation in a way that will help rather than hinder future relations and future negotiations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 2. every negotiator has two kinds of interests: in the substance and in the relationship - the relationship tends to become entangled with the problem
A

We are likely to treat people and problem as one. People draw from comments on substance unfounded inferences, which they then treat as facts about that person’s intentions and attitudes toward them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 2. every negotiator has two kinds of interests: in the substance and in the relationship - positional bargaining puts relationship and substance in conflict
A

Positional bargaining deals with a negotiator’s interest both in substance and in a good relationship by trading ond off against the other

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 3. disentangle the relationship from the substance; deal directly with the people problem - name the three basic categories
A

The various people problems all fall into one of the following three categories: perception, emotion, communication

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - what are the 8 rules of engagement?
A
  1. Their thinking is what counts
  2. Put yourself in their shoes
  3. Don’t deduce their intentions from your fears
  4. Don’t blame them for your problem
  5. Discuss each others perceptions
  6. Look for opportunities to act inconsistently with their perceptions
  7. Give them a stake in the outcome by making sure they participate in the problem
  8. Face-saving: make your proposals consistent with their values
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - rule 1: their thinking is what counts
A

Conflict lies not in objective reality, but in people’s heads - their thinking is the problem - fears, even if ill-founded are real fears and need to be dealt with - hope, even if unrealistic, may cause a war - facts, even if established, may do nothing to solve the problem - it is ultimately the reality as each side sees it that constitutes the problem in negotiation and opens the way to a solution

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - rule 2: put yourself in their shoes
A

People tend to see what the want to see, they focus on facts that confirm their prior perceptions and disregard or misinterpret those that call their perceptions into question. The ability to see the situation as the other side sees it, is one of the most important skills a negotiator can possess. If you understand empathetically the power of their point of view and feel the emotional force with which they believe in it, you may be able to reduce the area of conflict

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - rule 3: don’t deduce their intentions from your fears
A

It seems the ‘safe’ thing to do to assume that whatever you fear, the other side intends to do. The cost is that fresh ideas in the direction of agreement are spurned and subtle changes of position are ignored or rejected

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - rule 4: don’t blame them for your problem
A

Blaming is usually counterproductive - it firmly entangles the people with the problem. Distinguish the symptoms from the person with whom you are talking

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - rule 5: discuss each others perceptions
A

Communicating loudly and convincingly things you are willing to say that they would like to hear can be one of the best investments a negotiator can make. By taking time to work out the practical arrangements of that what you are willing to offer, you make your offer far more credible and far more attractive to the other side

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - rule 6: look for opportunities to act inconsistently with their perceptions
A

See if you can surprise, by instead of acting as an enemy, acting as a partner

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - rule 7: make sure they participate in the process, by giving them a stake in the outcome
A

Even if the terms of an agreement seems favourable, the other side may reject them simply out of a suspicion born of their exclusion from the drafting process. Agreement becomes much easier if both parties feel ownership of the ideas. The whole process of negotiation becomes stronger as each side puts their imprimatur bit by bit on a developing solution. Apart from the substantive merits, the feeling of participation in the process is perhaps the single most important factor in determining whether a negotiator accepts a proposal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 4. perception - rule 8: make your proposals consistent with their values (face-saving)
A

Face-saving reflects people’s needs to reconcile tge stand taken in a negotiation or an agreement with their existing principles and with their past words and deeds. If the substance can be phrased or conceptualized differently so that it seems a fair outcome, it becomes more acceptable - terms negotiated between a major city and its Hispanic community on access to municipal jobs were unacceptable to the mayor, until the agreement was withdrawn and the mayor was allowed to announce the same terms as his own decision, carrying out a campaign promise

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 5. emotion - what are the 7 rules of engagement?
A
  1. First recognize and understand emotions, theirs and yours
  2. Pay attention to “core concerns”
  3. Consider the role of identity
  4. Make emotions explicit and acknowledge them as legitimate
  5. Allow the other side to let off steam
  6. Don’t react to emotional outbursts
  7. Use symbolic gestures
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 5. emotion - rule 1: first recognize and understand emotions, theirs and yours
A

The parties may be more ready for battle than for cooperatively working out a solution to a common problem. It may be useful to write down what you feel, do the same for them. Negotiators who represent their organizations have issues on which they are particulary sensitive and other on which they are particulary proud. Why are you angry, why are they angry? What is at stake?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 5. emotion - rule 2: pay attention to “core concerns” - what are the 5 core interests that drive many emotions in negotiations?
A
  1. Autonomy - the desire to make your own choices, control your fate
  2. Appreciation - the desire to be recognized and valued
  3. Affiliation - the desire to belong as an accepted member of some peer group
  4. Role - the desire to have a meaningful purpose
  5. Status - the desire to feel fairly seen and acknowledged
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 5. emotion - rule 3: consider the role of identity
A

A perceived threat to one’s self-image or self-respect is a driver of negative emotion. Human beings apply their general tendency toward either-or thinking to their self-perception. Is someone’s sense of identity at stake during the negotiation?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 5. emotion - rule 4: make emotions explicit and acknowledge them as legitimate
A

Making feelings on both sides an explicit focus of discussion underscores the seriousness of the problem and makes the negotiation less reactive and more ‘pro-active’. Freed from the burden of unexpressed emotions, people will become more likely to work on the problem

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 5. emotion - rule 5: allow rhe other side to let off steam
A

People obtain psychological release through the process of recounting their grievances to an attentive audience. Letting of steam makes it easier to talk rationally later. A negotiator may be given a freer hand by her constituency after making an angry speech

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 5. emotion - rule 6: don’t react to emotional outbursts
A

Consider the rule that only one person can get angry at a time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 5. emotion - rule 7: use symbolic gestures
A

A red rose, a note of sympathy, a statement of regret, a small present for a grandchild, shaking hands, embracing, eating together, an apology - I am not wrong but I did something clumsy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 6. communication - what are the three big problems in communication
A
  1. Negotiators may not be willing to talk to one another
  2. The sides are not hearing what the other side is saying
  3. Genuine misunderstanding due to language
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 6. communication - what can be done about the three big problems in communication? - listen actively and acknowledge what is being said
A

Listening enables you to understand their perceptions, feel their emotions and hear what they are trying to say. Understanding is not agreeing. One can at the same time understand perfectly and disagree completely with what the other side is saying

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 6. communication - what can be done about the three big problems in communication? - speak to be understood
A

Talk, don’t debate, don’t persuade, be like two judges trying to reach agreement on how to decide a case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 6. communication - what can be done about the three big problems in communication? - speak about yourself, not about them
A

A statement about how you feel is difficult to challenge. You convey the same information without provoking a defensive reaction that will prevent them from taking it in

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 6. communication - what can be done about the three big problems in communication? - speak for a purpose
A

Know what you want to communicate and know what purpose this information will serve

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 6. prevention works best - what helps to structure the negotiation game in a way that disentangles the substantive problem from the relationship and protect people’s ego’s? - build a working relationship
A

The more quickly you can turn a stranger into someone you know, the easier a negotiation is likely to become. Get to know them and find out about their likes and dislikes. Arrive early to chat before the negotiation is scheduled to start and linger after it ends

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q
  1. Separate the people from the problem - 6. prevention works best - what helps to structure the negotiation game in a way that disentangles the substantive problem from the relationship and protect people’s ego’s? - face the problem, not the people
A

Think of parties as hardheaded, side-by-side search for a fair agreement advantageous to each. They may have different interests and perceptions, and have an emotional involvement, but jointly face a common task. Deal with the people as human beings and with the problem on its merits

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 1. reconcile interests, not positions - why is the difference between positions and interests crucial? - interests define the problem
A

The basic problem in a negotiation lies not in conflicting positions, but in the conflict between each side’s needs, desires, concerns and fears. Your position is something you have decided upon, your interests are what caused you to so decide

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 1. reconcile interests, not positions - why is the difference between positions and interests crucial? - behind opposed positions lie shared and compatible interests, as well as conflicting ones
A

We tend to assume that because the other side’s positions are opposed to ours, their interests must also be opposed. Agreement is often made possible precisely because interests differ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 2. how do you identify interests, given that the interests underlying positions may well be unexpressed, intangible and perhaps inconsistent? - ask ‘Why?
A

Figuring out their interests will be at least as important as figuring out yours - put yourself in their shoes and ask yourself “Why do they take this position?” for an understanding of the needs, hopes, fears or desires that it serves

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 2. how do you identify interests, given that the interests underlying positions may well be unexpressed, intangible and perhaps inconsistent? - ask ‘Why not?
A

Identify the basic decision that those on the other side probably see you asking them for, and ask yourself why they have not made that decision - what interests stand in the way? Analyse the consequences of agreeing vs. refusing to make the decision you are asking for

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 2. how do you identify interests, given that the interests underlying positions may well be unexpressed, intangible and perhaps inconsistent? - realise that each side has multiple interests
A

Do not assume that each person on the other side has the same interests. All negotiators have a constituency to whose interests they are sensitive. Try to understand the variety of somewhat differing interests that they need to take into account

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 2. how do you identify interests, given that the interests underlying positions may well be unexpressed, intangible and perhaps inconsistent? - the most powerful interests are basic human needs
A

If you can take care of basic human needs, you increase the chance of reaching and keeping agreement:

  • security
  • economic well-being
  • a sense of belonging
  • recognition
  • control over one’s life
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 2. how do you identify interests, given that the interests underlying positions may well be unexpressed, intangible and perhaps inconsistent? - make a list
A

Write the various interests down as they occur to you and place them in their estimated order of importance. This may stimulate ideas for how to meet them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 3. talking about interests - if you want to serve your interests, you will have to communicate them - how do you discuss interests constructively? - make your interests come alive
A
  • Be specific, give concrete details
  • Try to establish the legitimacy of your concerns
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 3. talking about interests - if you want to serve your interests, you will have to communicate them - how do you discuss interests constructively? - acknowledge their interests as part of the problem
A

In addition to demonstrating that you have understood their interests, it helps to acknowledge that their interests are part of the overall problem you are trying to solve

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 3. talking about interests - if you want to serve your interests, you will have to communicate them - how do you discuss interests constructively? - put the problem before your answer
A

Give you interests and reasoning first, and your conclusions or proposal later

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 3. talking about interests - if you want to serve your interests, you will have to communicate them - how do you discuss interests constructively? - look forward, not back
A

When looking back, neither party is seeking agreement or is even trying to influence the other. They identify a cause, not a purpose. They are not acting in their longterm interest

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 3. talking about interests - if you want to serve your interests, you will have to communicate them - how do you discuss interests constructively? - the question ‘Why?’ has two quite different meanings
A

You will satisfy your interests better if you talk about where you would like to go rather than about where you have come from

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 3. talking about interests - if you want to serve your interests, you will have to communicate them - how do you discuss interests constructively? - be concrete but flexible
A

How can you move from identifying interests to developing specific options and still remain flexible with regard to those options? Treat each option you formulate as simply illustrative > illustrative specificity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q
  1. Focus on interests, not positions - 3. talking about interests - if you want to serve your interests, you will have to communicate them - how do you discuss interests constructively? - be hard on the problem, soft on the people
A

It is usually advisable to be hard in talking about your interests, but separate the people from the problem. A rule of thumb is to give positive support to the human beings on the other side equal in strength to the vigor with which you emphasize the problem. The other side will dissociate herself from the problem in order to join you in doing something about it. Meanwhile you remain open to the other side’s point of view

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 1. diagnosis - which four major obstacles inhibit the inventing of an abundance of options?
A
  1. Premature judgement
  2. Search for the single answer
  3. The assumption of a fixed pie
  4. Thinking that ‘solving their problem is their problem’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 1. diagnosis - 1. premature judgement
A

Judgement hinders imagination

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 1. diagnosis - 2. searching for the single answer
A

If the first impediment to creative thinking is premature criticism, the second is premature closing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 1. diagnosis - 3. the assumption of a fixed pie
A

Each side sees the situation as essentially either/or. Either I get what is in dispute or you do

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 1. diagnosis - 4. thinking that ‘solving their problem is their problem’
A

For you as a negotiator to reach an agreement that meets your own self-interest, you need to develop a solution that also appeals to the self-interest of the other

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - what steps facilitate the invention of creative options?
A
  1. Separate the act of inventing options from the act of judging them
  2. Broaden the options on the table rather than look for a single answer
  3. Search for mutual gain
  4. Invent ways of making their decisions easy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding
A

As a negotiator, you will of necessity do much inventing by yourself. Separate the process of thinking up possible decisions from the process of selecting among them, separate the creative act from the critical one. Judgement hinders imagination. Consider the desirability of arranging an inventing ot brainstorm session with a few colleagues or friends

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding - 1. Brainstorm: define your purpose
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding - 2. choose a few participants
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding - 3. change the environment
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding - 4. design an informal atmosphere
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding - what to do before brainstorming? - 5. choose a facilitator
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
70
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding - what to do during brainstorming?
A
  1. Seat the participants side by side facing the problem -
  2. Clarify the ground rules, including the no-criticism rule -
  3. Brainstorm -
  4. Record the ideas in full view -
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding - what to do after brainstorming?
A
  1. Star the most promising ideas -
  2. Invent improvements for promising ideas -
  3. Set up a time to evaluate ideas and decide -
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 1. separate inventing from deciding - consider brainstorming with the other side
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 2. broaden your options
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
74
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 2. broaden your options - multiply options by shuttling between the specific and the general: The Circle Chart
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
75
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 2. broaden your options - look through the eyes of different experts
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 2. broaden your options - invent agreements of different strengths
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
77
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 2. broaden your options - change the scope of a proposed agreement
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
78
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 3. look for mutual gain
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
79
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 3. look for mutual gain - identify shared interests
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
80
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 3. look for mutual gain - dovetail differing interests
A
  1. Any difference in interests? -
  2. Different beliefs -
  3. Different values placed on time? -
  4. Different forecasts? -
  5. Differences in aversion to risk? -
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
81
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 3. look for mutual gain - ask for their preferences
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
82
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 4. make their decision easy
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
83
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 4. make their decision easy - whose shoes?
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
84
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 4. make their decision easy - what decision?
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
85
Q
  1. Invent options for mutual gain - 2. prescription - 4. make their decision easy - making threats is not enough
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
86
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
87
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 1. deciding on the basis of will is costly
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
88
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 2. the case for using objective criteria
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
89
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 2. the case for using objective criteria - principled negotiation produces wise agreements amicably and efficiently
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
90
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 3. developing objective criteria
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
91
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 3. developing objective criteria - fair standards
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
92
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 3. developing objective criteria - fair procedures
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
93
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 4. negotiating with objective criteria
A
94
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 4. negotiating with objective criteria - frame each issue as a joint search for objective criteria
A
95
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 4. negotiating with objective criteria - reason and be open to reason
A
96
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 4. negotiating with objective criteria - never yield to pressure
A
97
Q
  1. Insist on using objective criteria - 4. negotiating with objective criteria - “It’s company policy”
A
98
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful?
A
99
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 1. protecting yourself
A
100
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 1. protecting yourself - the cost of using a bottom line
A
101
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 1. protecting yourself - know your BATNA
A
102
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 1. protecting yourself - the insecurity of an unknown BATNA
A
103
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 1. protecting yourself - formulate a trip wire
A
104
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 2. making the most of your assets
A
105
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 2. making the most of your assets - the better your BATNA, the greater your power
A
106
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 2. making the most of your assets - develop your BATNA
A
107
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 2. making the most of your assets - consider the other side’s BATNA
A
108
Q
  1. What if they are more powerful? - 3. when the other side is powerful
A
109
Q
  1. What if they won’t play?
A
110
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 1. negotiation jujitsu
A
111
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 1. negotiation jujitsu - don’t attack their position, look behind it
A
112
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 1. negotiation jujitsu - don’t defend your ideas, invite criticism and advice
A
113
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 1. negotiation jujitsu - recast an attack on you as an attack on the problem
A
114
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 1. negotiation jujitsu - ask questions and pause
A
115
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 2. consider the one-text procedure
A
116
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull
A
117
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Please correct me if I’m wrong”
A
118
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Please correct me if I’m wrong” - analysis
A
119
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “We appreciate what you’ve done for us”
A
120
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “We appreciate what you’ve done for us” - analysis
A
121
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Our concern is fairness”
A
122
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Our concern is fairness” - analysis
A
123
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “We would like to settle this on the basis of an independent standards, not of who can do what to whom”
A
124
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “We would like to settle this on the basis of an independent standards, not of who can do what to whom” - analysis
A
125
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Trust is a separate issue”
A
126
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Trust is a separate issue” - analysis
A
127
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Could I ask you a few questions to see whether my facts are right?”
A
128
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Could I ask you a few questions to see whether my facts are right?” - analysis
A
129
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “What’s the principle behind your action?”
A
130
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “What’s the principle behind your action?” - analysis
A
131
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Let me see if I understand what you’re saying”
A
132
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Let me see if I understand what you’re saying” - analysis
A
133
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Let me get back to you”
A
134
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Let me get back to you” - analysis
A
135
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Let me show you where I have trouble following some of you reasoning”
A
136
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “Let me show you where I have trouble following some of you reasoning” - analysis
A
137
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “One fair solution might be …”
A
138
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “One fair solution might be …” - analysis
A
139
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “If we agree … if we disagree …”
A
140
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “If we agree … if we disagree …” - analysis
A
141
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “We’d be happy to see if we can leave when it’s most convenient for you”
A
142
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “We’d be happy to see if we can leave when it’s most convenient for you” - analysis
A
143
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “It’s been a pleasure dealing with you”
A
144
Q
  1. What if they won’t play? - 3. getting them to play: the case of Jones Realty and Frank Turnbull - “It’s been a pleasure dealing with you” - analysis
A
145
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks?
A
146
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 1. how do you negotiate about the rules of the game?
A
147
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 1. how do you negotiate about the rules of the game? - separate the people from the problem
A
148
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 1. how do you negotiate about the rules of the game? - focus on interests, not positions
A
149
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 1. how do you negotiate about the rules of the game? - invent options for mutual gain
A
150
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 1. how do you negotiate about the rules of the game? - insist on using objective criteria
A
151
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 2. some common tricky tactics
A
152
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 3. deliberate deception - phony facts
A
153
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 3. deliberate deception - ambiguous authority
A
154
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 3. deliberate deception - dubious intentions
A
155
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 3. deliberate deception - less than full disclosure is not the same as deception
A
156
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 4. psychological warfare - stressful situations
A
157
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 4. psychological warfare - personal attacks
A
158
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 4. psychological warfare - the good-gut/bad-guy routine
A
159
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 4. psychological warfare - threats
A
160
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 5. positional pressure tactics - refusal to negotiate
A
161
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 5. positional pressure tactics - extreme demands
A
162
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 5. positional pressure tactics - escalating demands
A
163
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 5. positional pressure tactics - lock-in tactics
A
164
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 5. positional pressure tactics - hardhearted partner
A
165
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 5. positional pressure tactics - a calculated delay
A
166
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 5. positional pressure tactics - “Take it or leave it.”
A
167
Q
  1. What if they use dirty tricks? - 6. don’t be a victim
A
168
Q
  1. In conclusion - 1. three points, you knew it all the time
A
169
Q
  1. In conclusion - 2. learn from doing
A
170
Q
  1. In conclusion - 3. “Winning”
A
171
Q

Question 1: Does positional bargaining ever make sense?

A
172
Q

Question 1: Does positional bargaining ever make sense? - how important is it to avoid an arbitrary outcome?

A
173
Q

Question 1: Does positional bargaining ever make sense? - how complex are the issues?

A
174
Q

Question 1: Does positional bargaining ever make sense? - how important is it to maintain a good working relationship?

A
175
Q

Question 1: Does positional bargaining ever make sense? - what are the other side’s expectations, and how hard would they be to change?

A
176
Q

Question 1: Does positional bargaining ever make sense? - where are you in the negotiation?

A
177
Q

Question 2: What if the other side believes in a different standard of fairness?

A
178
Q

Question 2: What if the other side believes in a different standard of fairness? - explore how conflicting standards have developed

A
179
Q

Question 2: What if the other side believes in a different standard of fairness? - agreement on the ‘best’ standards is not necessary

A
180
Q

Question 3: Should I be fair if I don’t have to be?

A
181
Q

Question 3: Should I be fair if I don’t have to be? - how much is the difference worth to you?

A
182
Q

Question 3: Should I be fair if I don’t have to be? - will tge unfair result be durable?

A
183
Q

Question 3: Should I be fair if I don’t have to be? - what danage might the unfair result cause to this or other relationships?

A
184
Q

Question 3: Should I be fair if I don’t have to be? - will your conscience bother you?

A
185
Q

Question 4: What do I do if the people are the problem?

A
186
Q

Question 4: What do I do if the people are the problem? - build a working relationship independent of agreement or disagreement

A
187
Q

Question 4: What do I do if the people are the problem? - negotiate the relationship

A
188
Q

Question 4: What do I do if the people are the problem? - distinguish how you treat them from how they treat you

A
189
Q

Question 4: What do I do if the people are the problem? - deal rationally with apparent irrationality

A
190
Q

Question 5: Should I negotiate even with terrorists or someone like Hitler? When does it make sense not to negotiate?

A
191
Q

Question 5: Should I negotiate even with terrorists or someone like Hitler? When does it make sense not to negotiate? - negotiate with terrorists?

A
192
Q

Question 5: Should I negotiate even with terrorists or someone like Hitler? When does it make sense not to negotiate? - negotiate with someone like Hitler?

A
193
Q

Question 5: Should I negotiate even with terrorists or someone like Hitler? When does it make sense not to negotiate? - negotiate when people are acting out of religious conviction?

A
194
Q

Question 5: Should I negotiate even with terrorists or someone like Hitler? When does it make sense not to negotiate? - when does it make sense not to negotiate?

A
195
Q

Question 6: How should I ajust my negotiating approach to account for differences of personality, gender, culture, and so on?

A
196
Q

Question 6: How should I ajust my negotiating approach to account for differences of personality, gender, culture, and so on? - get in step

A
197
Q

Question 6: How should I ajust my negotiating approach to account for differences of personality, gender, culture, and so on? - adapt your general advice to the specific situation

A
198
Q

Question 6: How should I ajust my negotiating approach to account for differences of personality, gender, culture, and so on? - pay attention to differences of belief and custom, but avoid stereotyping individuals

A
199
Q

Question 6: How should I ajust my negotiating approach to account for differences of personality, gender, culture, and so on? - question your assumptions; listen actively

A
200
Q

Question 7: How do I decide things like ‘Where should we meet?’, ‘How should we communicate?’, ‘Who should make the first offer’ and ‘How high should I start?’

A
201
Q

Question 7: How do I decide things like ‘Where should we meet?’

A
202
Q

Question 7: How do I decide things like ‘How should we communicate?’

A
203
Q

Question 7: How do I decide things like ‘Who should make the first offer’

A
204
Q

Question 7: How do I decide things like ‘How high should I start?’

A
205
Q

Question 7: strategy depends on preparation

A
206
Q

Question 8: Concretely, how do I move from inventing options to making commitments?

A
207
Q

Question 8: Concretely, how do I move from inventing options to making commitments? - think about closure from the beginning

A
208
Q

Question 8: Concretely, how do I move from inventing options to making commitments? - consider crafting a framework agreement

A
209
Q

Question 8: Concretely, how do I move from inventing options to making commitments? - move towards commitment gradually

A
210
Q

Question 8: Concretely, how do I move from inventing options to making commitments? - be persistent in pursuing your interests but not rigid in pursuing any particular solution

A
211
Q

Question 8: Concretely, how do I move from inventing options to making commitments? - make an offer

A
212
Q

Question 8: Concretely, how do I move from inventing options to making commitments? - be generous at the end

A
213
Q

Question 9: How do I try out these ideas without taking too much risk?

A
214
Q

Question 9: How do I try out these ideas without taking too much risk? - start small

A
215
Q

Question 9: How do I try out these ideas without taking too much risk? - make an investment

A
216
Q

Question 9: How do I try out these ideas without taking too much risk? - review your performance

A
217
Q

Question 9: How do I try out these ideas without taking too much risk? - prepare !

A
218
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power?

A
219
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - some things you can’t get

A
220
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - how you negotiate makes a big difference

A
221
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - ‘resources’ are not the same as ‘negotiation power’

A
222
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - don’t ask ‘Who is more powerful’

A
223
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - there are many sources of negotiation power

A
224
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - there are many sources of negotiation power - there is power in developing a good working relationship between the people negotiating

A
225
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - there are many sources of negotiation power - there is power in effective communication

A
226
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - there are many sources of negotiation power - there is power in understanding interests

A
227
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - there are many sources of negotiation power - there is power in inventing an elegant option

A
228
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - there are many sources of negotiation power - there is power in using external standards of legitimacy

A
229
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - there are many sources of negotiation power - there is power in developing a good BATNA

A
230
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - there are many sources of negotiation power - there is power in making a carefully crafted commitment

A
231
Q

Question 10: Can the way I negotiate really make a difference if the other side is more powerful? And how do I enhance my negotiating power? - make the most of your potential power

A

Boeken (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions