Before delving into this book I thought that I would find ways to affirm my current negotiation style. Within the introduction and later in the book I realized I would be questioning it. In the introduction Fisher and Ury describe the different forms of negotiation. Hard Negotiation, Soft Negotiation, Standard Negotiation, and Principled Negotiation. I had always thought that my way of compromising and finding a consensus was fine, until I knew the definitions of Hard and Soft Negotiation.
Hard Negotiation: Involves seeing the negotiation process as a contest which you plan to win. You take extreme positions and stand by them firmly mostly until the other person decides to give in. It often involves producing an equally hard response that exhausts the negotiator and their resources and also brings harm to the relationship with the other party (Fisher, Ury, & Patton, 2011, xxviii).
Soft Negotiation: Involves avoiding personal conflict and making compromises to reach agreement. As well as good-natured resolution. The good-nature of this style of leads to feelings of exploitation and feeling bitterness (Fisher, et …show more content…
I was used hard negotiation tactics such as focusing on winning, focusing on our positions, unwillingness to defeat, and ultimately creating a dent in my relationship. Both of our egos were getting in the way much like how Fisher and Ury stated when they said, "Your ego becomes identified with your position. You now have a new interest in 'saving face '-in reconciling further action with past positions-making it less and less likely that any agreement will wisely reconcile the parties ' original interests (Fisher, et al. 2011, p.5)." We hadn 't reconciled the issue as we are both slightly sticking to our positions, misinterpreting what the other was saying, fighting over an event, and not putting ourselves in the others
Hard Negotiation: Involves seeing the negotiation process as a contest which you plan to win. You take extreme positions and stand by them firmly mostly until the other person decides to give in. It often involves producing an equally hard response that exhausts the negotiator and their resources and also brings harm to the relationship with the other party (Fisher, Ury, & Patton, 2011, xxviii).
Soft Negotiation: Involves avoiding personal conflict and making compromises to reach agreement. As well as good-natured resolution. The good-nature of this style of leads to feelings of exploitation and feeling bitterness (Fisher, et …show more content…
I was used hard negotiation tactics such as focusing on winning, focusing on our positions, unwillingness to defeat, and ultimately creating a dent in my relationship. Both of our egos were getting in the way much like how Fisher and Ury stated when they said, "Your ego becomes identified with your position. You now have a new interest in 'saving face '-in reconciling further action with past positions-making it less and less likely that any agreement will wisely reconcile the parties ' original interests (Fisher, et al. 2011, p.5)." We hadn 't reconciled the issue as we are both slightly sticking to our positions, misinterpreting what the other was saying, fighting over an event, and not putting ourselves in the others