Part 1: Complete the Negotiation Style Self-Assessment located here. Once you have completed the self-assessment, write a response that includes the following:

QUESTION

For the Unit I Assignment, you will complete two parts:

Part 1: Complete the Negotiation Style Self-Assessment located here. Once you have completed the self-assessment, write a response that includes the following:

• A description of your conflict style results
• How you feel this information can be useful to you as you negotiate with others
• When your style is appropriate and inappropriate
• What bargaining tactics you prefer

Part 1 must be a minimum of one full page in length. Please note that you do not need to submit your completed self-assessment. Part 1 of your assignment is to provide only the description of your results, as detailed above.

Part 2: For the second part of this assignment, you will explain when negotiation is appropriate. Please explain the following points:

• When you should negotiate (including a specific example)
• When you should not negotiate (including a specific example)
• When mutual adjustment occurs and what part it plays in negotiations.

Part 2 must be at least one full page in length. You are required to use at least your textbook as a reference. You may use the CSU Online Library or the Internet for other resources.

Submit Part 1 and Part 2 in one Word document. Please label the parts for clarity by using headings. Follow proper APA format, and include a title page and reference page. Cite and reference all outside sources used.

ANSWER

Negotiation Styles and the Appropriateness of Negotiation

Part 1: Negotiation Style Self-Assessment Results

In completing the Negotiation Style Self-Assessment, I have gained valuable insights into my preferred conflict style and negotiation approach. Based on the assessment, my primary conflict style is a collaborative style, characterized by a high concern for self and a high concern for others. This style indicates a cooperative and problem-solving orientation, aiming to find mutually beneficial solutions. It suggests that I prefer to work collaboratively, seek consensus, and maintain relationships during negotiations.

Understanding my conflict style is beneficial as I negotiate with others because it helps me become aware of my natural tendencies and preferences. It allows me to leverage my strengths and adapt my approach when interacting with individuals who have different negotiation styles. By recognizing that I tend to prioritize both my own interests and the interests of others, I can actively seek win-win outcomes and foster positive relationships.

While a collaborative style is generally effective and appropriate in most negotiation situations, there are instances where other styles may be more suitable (Boud et al., 1992). For example, in highly competitive or time-sensitive situations where quick decisions are necessary, a more assertive or competitive style may be required to protect one’s own interests. Additionally, when dealing with individuals who display a highly adversarial or uncooperative approach, adopting a more assertive stance can be necessary to ensure a fair outcome.

Regarding bargaining tactics, as someone inclined towards a collaborative negotiation style, I prefer to use integrative tactics. These tactics involve focusing on shared interests, exploring creative solutions, and building relationships based on trust and open communication. Integrative bargaining allows for joint problem-solving, where parties work together to maximize the value and create mutually beneficial agreements. By employing these tactics, I aim to foster a cooperative atmosphere that encourages information sharing and innovative solutions.

Part 2: The Appropriateness of Negotiation

Negotiation is a versatile and valuable tool in various contexts. Understanding when negotiation is appropriate can significantly enhance decision-making and conflict resolution processes. Consider the following points:

 When you should negotiate

Negotiation is appropriate when there are divergent interests or conflicts between parties that need resolution. For example, in a business setting, negotiation may be necessary when two departments have conflicting objectives, and a compromise must be reached to achieve organizational goals  (Weiss et al., 1994. By engaging in negotiation, parties can explore various options, address concerns, and develop mutually acceptable solutions that satisfy their respective interests.

 When you should not negotiate

There are instances when negotiation may not be appropriate or effective. For example, negotiations may be unsuitable in situations involving severe power imbalances, such as cases of abuse or exploitation. In such circumstances, negotiation may perpetuate the harmful dynamics or fail to address the underlying power dynamics adequately. In such cases, alternative approaches like seeking legal remedies or mediation may be more appropriate.

Mutual adjustment in negotiations

Mutual adjustment occurs when parties involved in a negotiation make concessions or adjustments to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. It plays a crucial role in negotiations by allowing parties to find common ground and compromise on their respective positions. Through mutual adjustment, negotiators can trade off certain preferences or demands to achieve a more balanced outcome  (Wapshott et al., 2013). This process involves active listening, empathy, and an open-minded approach to finding solutions that address the interests of all parties involved.

In conclusion, understanding one’s negotiation style provides valuable insights into individual tendencies and preferences during conflict resolution. Recognizing when a collaborative style is appropriate or when other negotiation styles may be necessary allows negotiators to adapt their approach to different contexts. Negotiation is appropriate in situations involving conflicting interests, and mutual adjustment plays a crucial role in finding mutually acceptable solutions. By effectively employing negotiation tactics, such as integrative bargaining, negotiators can strive for win-win outcomes and build sustainable relationships based on trust and cooperation.

References

Boud, D. (1992). The use of self-assessment schedules in negotiated learning. Studies in higher education, 17(2), 185-200.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075079212331382657 

Wapshott, R., & Mallett, O. (2013). The unspoken side of mutual adjustment: Understanding intersubjective negotiation in small professional service firms. International Small Business Journal, 31(8), 978-996.https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0266242612450728

Weiss, S. E. (1994). Negotiating with’Romans’-part 2. MIT Sloan Management Review, 35(3), 85.https://search.proquest.com/openview/013ded6e6b86bb9662dd752717e6a9f3/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=26142