You are not logged in.
Announcement
#1 2007-11-07 08:57:24
- grill1
- Member
- From: Stanford
- Registered: 2007-01-22
- Posts: 16
Not a one time engagement
I agree that too many people view negotiations as a one time engagement and do not bother in nurtutring a relationship for future negotiations. Politicians should have to sit through a more detailed lecture on this topic. I believe that when mislead, no matter how slight, gaining creditibility during a tough situation such as a negotiation is extremely difficult. I do not believe that any of the ideas or concepts were new, but most people find rule #3 very hard, apologize and own your contribution.![]()
Cheers....
Offline
#2 2007-11-07 09:47:02
- Ryan.Mason
- New member
- Registered: 2007-10-04
- Posts: 7
Re: Not a one time engagement
I really appreciated hearing Mr Christensen's lecture on negotiations. I had never considered the importance of maintaining a dialog. It made me think of the hostage negotiators in the movies who are always trying to talk to the hostage takers. I also appreciate the focus on relationships; some seemingly trivial conversations can lead to progress in negotiation. People aren't robots out to maximize their stake at every step. There's real value in the conversation outside of the specific negotiation topic. Once a relationship is established, real negotiations on a human level can occur.
Offline
#3 2007-11-07 10:23:01
- saranwut.takapong
- Member
- Registered: 2007-10-09
- Posts: 24
Re: Not a one time engagement
I really Mr Christensen's talk on the topic. He's also a great speaker. I really like that he emphasized that negotiation is not a one-time encounter. It's the game theory element that is put to practical use, as the players in the game may use vastly different strategy, knowing that the game is multi-step. I like how he views negotiation as building a relationship. I have never thought of the subject that way before. You may gain more in the long run from the relationship you have created than what you would even if you are at advantage during the first negotiation. Also, I really appreciate that he used a lot of incidences this experience to solidify each point.
Offline
#4 2007-11-07 11:22:32
- rachel.shen
- New member
- Registered: 2007-10-09
- Posts: 8
Re: Not a one time engagement
I had the good fortune of attending a workshop on negotiations with Stan Christensen and we had the opportunity to look more closely at negotiations as something more sophisticated than a one time engagement. This idea remained the most striking to me in Wednesday's lecture because it highlighted how important mentality behind negotiations and good relationship management are to successful negotiations. I especially agree with his comments that so many of the people you conduct negotiations with are not one-time encounters -- examples started popping into my head as I thought more about it -- and I can think of many occasions were approaching negotiations as a transaction has been detrimental.
Offline
#5 2007-12-09 21:29:45
- noah.schmitz
- Member
- Registered: 2007-10-09
- Posts: 14
Re: Not a one time engagement
I too appreciated this point above all. In particular, Stan mentioned two very good strategies to employ during negotiation to build the relationship and ensure that any repeat encounter will be positive:
1) Communication is convincing the other party that you are listening
2) Try to find a way to give something extra to the other party
So many people focus on themselves during negotiation. (How do I get what I want?) If you focus more on the other person, really listen to them, try to understand the meaning behind their words, you can create a positive solution that is for the greater good. (And which will end up benefitting you anyway.)
Offline
#6 2007-12-14 16:27:18
- aanne
- New member
- Registered: 2007-12-13
- Posts: 8
Re: Not a one time engagement
Stan is a wonderful speaker and he had great answers to all the questions. I would consider my greatest takeaway from this talk is to not view the negotiation as a one time engagement. Once I realize that, other points he made seem to follow logically - like dont follow tactics, establish a relationship, expand the pie, etc.
Offline