Discussion Intended To Reach An Mutually Beneficial Agreement


Posted on

It aims to resolve points of divergence, to obtain benefits for an individual or a collective, or to obtain results to satisfy different interests. It is often achieved by presenting a position and making concessions to reach an agreement. The extent to which the negotiating parties trust each other in the implementation of the negotiated solution is an important factor in determining whether the negotiations are successful. A vision of negotiation includes three fundamental elements: process, behaviour and substance. The process is about how the parties negotiate: the framework of the negotiations, the parties to the negotiations, the tactics of the parties and the order and the stages in which all this takes place. Behaviour refers to the relationships between these parties, the communication between them and the styles they adopt. The content refers to what the parties are negotiating: the agenda, the topics (useful positions and interests), the options and agreements reached at the end. [Citation required] Negative effects on the various phases of the negotiation process have negative effects. Although various negative emotions influence the outcome of the negotiations, the most sought-after anger is by far. Angry negotiators plan to adopt more competitive strategies and cooperate less before negotiations begin. [62] These competition strategies are linked to reduced common outcomes. During negotiations, anger disrupts the process by reducing trust, tarnishing the judgment of the parties, reducing the parties` attention and changing their central purpose from an agreement to retaliation against the other party. [66] Angry negotiators are less attentive to the interests of the adversary and judge their interests with less precision and thus achieve less common benefits.

[69] In addition, anger increases the likelihood that they will reject profitable offers, because anger makes negotiators more self-centered in their preferences. [66] Opponents who get really angry (or cry or lose control in another way) make mistakes instead: make sure they are in your favor. [33] Anger also does not contribute to negotiating objectives: it reduces common benefits[62] and does not increase personal profits because angry negotiators do not succeed. [69] In addition, negative emotions lead to the acceptance of colonies that are not in the positive use function, but rather have a negative advantage. [70] However, the expression of negative emotions during negotiations can sometimes be beneficial: legitimate anger can be an effective way to show commitment, sincerity and needs. [66] In addition, although NA reduces the benefits of integration tasks, this is a better strategy than the PA for distribution tasks (for example. B, zero sums). [68] In his work on the negative effects on arousal and white noise, Seidner argued for the existence of a mechanism for the impact of negative effects by observing the devaluation of spokespeople from other ethnic backgrounds. Negotiations can in turn be negatively influenced by over-the-air hostility towards an ethnic or gender group. [71] Negotiations consist of a dialogue between two or more individuals or parties who are expected to achieve a positive outcome on one or more issues when there is a conflict on at least one of these issues.

Negotiations are an interaction and a process between companies that compromise to agree on issues of common interest while optimizing their various public services. [1] This positive result may be for all parties involved or only for one or some of them.