- 1、本文档共19页,可阅读全部内容。
- 2、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。
- 3、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载。
- 4、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
查看更多
Ugli Orange Negotiation Discussion Questions丑橘橙协商讨论的问题
Learning points
Everything is negotiable
Some groups do not understand why there is a discussion b/w Jones Roland because Cardoza owns the oranges
Process of negotiation involves…one or more of the following phases
Angels vs. Devils perspective
Original view as classic zero-sum distributional situation
Can reach Impasse/Compromise/Integrative agreement
If agreement, then planing how to implement agreement because of prior hostile relationship
Hire third party
Implement contract
For those who reached integrative agreement
Focus on interest vs. positions
Position=I need all of the oranges
Interest= I need the rinds/juice of all the oranges
Effective communication
Information exchange is power
Good questioning/good revealing
e.g,. Why do you need oranges? What do you need it for?
Accidental disclosure
Luck
For those who reached agreement
Exchange of information – when asked “what do you need the oranges for”, the answer “I need the juice” came
Accidentally
From further elaboration – getting really specific (e.g., not just ‘I need it to help people, but I need x to create y). Info disclosure may be inhibited if parties are suspicious of each other ‘stealing’ company secrets etc. Also, other party may not be ‘paying attention’ because of the stress of the hostile relations b/w the two parties
When they were cornered by the threats made by the other party
Some asked “What part of the orange do you need?” which resulted in the solution (This was based on previous experience of the negotiator).
Sub-optimal agreements (e.g., 50-50 compromise; 70-30 agreements) were made when
parties used their status (“I am with the government”),
seemingly rational arguments (“loss of adult lives is worse than loss of infant life”) to persuade the other,
Spoke of their positions only in abstract “e.g., I am saving pregnant women vs. I am saving infants” or
Answered the ‘why’ question in the abstract (e.g., I need the oranges to save pregnant women vs. I need the oranges to save infant
文档评论(0)