I was the “recruiter” in this exercise, and I was happy with our negotiation and the scores. My score was average or slightly above it, and the candidate’s score was somewhat less than mine. I think the scores reflected what I was targeting. I was a bit surprised by the extreme scoring by Anish and Adam and wondered how it happened and what it meant for the personality or the negotiating talent of the parties.
Even though the instruction was to do the best for myself, I did not set my target too high. A result like that of Anish and Adam’s would have conflicted with my core value of fairness. I would see that not as a victory, but taking unfair advantage of someone. This approach does not always work well for me in real-life negotiations. Usually, I put on the table what I think is fair for everyone or what I am willing to offer, and try to explain my reasons why it is a fair offer. If I decide that the other side is not being “straight,” I get upset and walk away. Sometimes I get upset afterwards, when I discover that I was lied to or I was manipulated. In the past I have always sent my wife and brother-in-law to purchase a car, as I have found that I just could not deal with car salesmen. I guess, I just confessed to not having been a good negotiator.
Here is how I went about the negotiation in this exercise: I first studied the scores and ordered the negotiation points from the highest point value to the lowest. This order gave me a basis for deciding where I could make concessions without losing too many points, and what I needed to concentrate on. The tactics I used were reasoning, friendliness, and bargaining. I tried to frame myself as a “friendly recruiter.” I blamed the “company policies” for not being able to give him what he was asking for, and became the “good guy” when I made a concession. Before I made a commitment to any of the negotiation topics, I went down the list (with the order of point significance) and tried to establish what the applicant was asking for and what he might be willing to accept. Then, I bargained for each item by giving up something in exchange for something else. I started my offers at a point below the average scores and below what the candidate was asking for. I explained what I was willing to exchange for something else. All the while, I was trying to keep a running calculator in my mind to make sure that I came up with a positive score in each deal. At the end, I was happy with the results as I did not settle for extremely high or low points. The candidate seemed to be happy with what he got, as everything was settled in the spirit of “fair exchange” and within reason.
I did not have any preconceived notions about my partner, as I did not know him before. However, I observed that he carefully studied the point values, and seemed to be deciding on his targets. This told me that he was not likely to be a “door mat” and we would have to bargain for points.
What I am learning from this exercise (and the other ones in this class) that I can improve my behavior and social skills by reading and learning; reflecting and self-evaluating; and, by practice. In the future I will be looking at negotiation as a business process, where parties are using certain tactics and framing the situation to favor themselves, rather than just playing games.
No comments:
Post a Comment