Collaborative Negotiation

When negotiating, there are many different schools of thought that are effective in getting to a final answer, a deal or compromise. However, understanding the benefits of some of the better approaches can prove to be effective in making sure that both parties are not wasting their time or simply going around in circles. For me, the collaborative negotiation strategy is the dominant one that I personally like to utilize. It is built upon the premise of listening, looking for common opportunities and challenges, and then addressing them while working towards a deal. Ultimately, this collaboration style differs from others because it requires intense interaction between both parties and looks for a win-win compromise. It's best to know what management style one possesses by undergoing an assessment. The overarching benefits of this style reflect a compromise that both parties contributed to, rather than one side simply settling on an option because it is an ultimatum or the best possible solution. Collaborative negotiation is my dominant style because it ensures better results for everyone; moreover, achieving a stronger majority for it is a core opportunity for improvement. 

The collaborative negotiation style is based on finding a solution that works for both parties through engaging, listening and more. Generally, this style requires “full, open, and truthful exchange” that requires both parties to try new approaches towards a solution (Wondolleck and Yaffee 122). Rather than admitting weaknesses or gaps, both parties utilize this transparency in order to come to a better agreement. Indeed, Steven Smutko, in Negotiation and Collaborative Problem Solving, argued that this style also requires “direct communication of interests, aspirations, expectations, beliefs, and concerns” (4). Such transparency places all of the cards on the table and allows both parties to fully interpret and understand all aspects of a posited deal or bargain. This is my dominant style because I believe that it is the best approach as well. When working with salesmen or women in stores, I generally try to get the best price for an expensive item, while still ensuring that the other party gets their fair commission, the reward for the sale or acknowledgment to a manager for their good work. I thus apply it even on a daily basis. 

The collaborative negotiation style also results in better compromises for both parties. Because one party is not taking all of the action, there is much more robust communication. Consequently, diverse and creative solutions can become up with. Smutko argued that “negotiators who take advantage of opportunities to employ a joint decision-making perspective, can seek integrative solutions” (4). Integrative solutions are based on what the different parties have expressed as core needs and wants. Once both parties have fully expressed that, then offers on the table are much more likely to be pleasing to both parties. Not only that but when both parties have had an opportunity to speak, they are more likely to accept and try a new approach that was not explored before (Wondolleck and Yaffee 123). Surely, the overwhelming benefits that this style offers is much more beneficial than just having a single party pose an ultimatum. 

One recent example of effective collaborative negotiation was in my senior care clinic where employees were concerned about taking days off. They understood that there were serious implications and repercussions for calling out, especially when they were supposed to care for elderly people. After an individual was let go for not calling or giving notice, other employees expressed concern. After a collaborative meeting with the team of caretakers, we found that there were many other opportunities to improve upon the method we handled sick days. However, we would not have been able to come up with a great game plan to resolve the issue unless I had actively listened and taken note of the care taker’s needs as well. For instance, they wanted a better way to trade shifts with each other in the event that they had an emergency. By setting up a new way for them to exchange contact details and update the management, we effectively reduced the number of sick days that people used. Such an example shows that this negotiation style can be a win-win for both parties. 

Through ongoing personal and professional development, one aspect that I could improve on is building a stronger majority. While the ultimate goal in any negotiation is to build a unanimous consensus, many times we are lucky to just get the majority. But, this is an aspect of negotiating, especially with many people or groups, that can always be improved. I could improve my rate of acceptance for deals and bargains by spending more time listening to some of the dissenting persons in the group in order to get a richer understanding of why they are not happy with the deal, even though the majority is. Also, I could utilize the existing people in the group to help convince others that it is the best approach. In this sense, it would be a stronger form of social consensus through peer pressure within the group. In the event that a few persons are not willing to proactively work together and listen to the other’s needs, then this may be the final form of recourse. Ultimately, listening to these individuals and integrating their needs into the final outcome would most likely be an effective solution for achieving a greater majority of acceptance when negotiating.  

As we have seen, collaborative negotiation is my dominant style because it makes deals a win-win and serves the needs of all parties effectively. It is based on the premise of listening and coming up with proactive solutions. I employ this strategy on a regular basis by even negotiating with salespeople. In a broader example, I utilized this style of negotiation when confronting the fact that elderly caretakers need to be more careful when taking sick days, as they disrupt workflow. Finally, a core area of improvement is getting a majority consensus of decisions when dealing in a group environment. This can be accomplished by integrating their specific needs into the equation and following through on it.

Works Cited

Smutko, Steven. "Negotiation and Collaborative Problem Solving.” Negotiation and Collaborative Problem Solving, vol. 1, 2005, pp. 1-29. 

Wondolleck, Julia, and Steven Yaffee. Making Collaboration Work: Lessons From Innovation In Natural Resource Management. Washington D.C.: Island Press, 2000.