Home » Business

Settlement of a Problem, An Attempt to Cause

Aug 17, 2007
It is much easier to discuss objective yardsticks for settlement of a problem, than to attempt to cause one another to recede. The independent standards and yardstick are even more relevant, when some parties are involved in negotiations. In such cases the item tender is specially difficult: it requires creation of coalitions inside each of the parties, and than more participants of tender has agreed concerning any item, the more difficult is to change it. Besides if the partner has voters or it should agree the operatings the heads, the problem of development of items, and then their variation becomes.

At preparation for principal negotiations it is necessary to answer two questions: how to develop objective yardsticks and how to apply them in negotiations? Fair yardsticks. They should be independent of desires of the parties, and also should be legal and practical. The objective yardsticks should approach(suit), at least theoretically, for both parties. One of methods of revealing of suitability of yardstick is its check on a possibility of mutual use.

Fair procedures. Let's recollect an ancient method of dividing of a pie. One person cuts, and other selects to itself a chunk. Anybody from them after that can not complain of the breach of justice. Considering procedural decisions, it is possible to settle dissents: by turns, with the help, having accorded a right to decide to someone to third (intermediary, daysman known expert).

Negotiations if there is objective yardsticks. It is necessary to remember following rules. 1. Prepare each problem for joint search of objective yardsticks. 2. Reason and be open for reasons, to which one the principles can best be applicable. 3. Never give in to stress, but only to a principle.

At preparation of a problem for joint search of objective yardsticks it is necessary to learn(find out): what approach of your partners. Then it is necessary to agree upon yardsticks. Each of the yardsticks which have been put forward by other party and utilised you, will render clout on outcome of negotiations. It will be more complex(difficult) to them to counter to applying of own yardsticks.

In the certain situations there can be two yardsticks, which one both parties consider (count) legal, but which one give different results. In this case completely legal will dedicate discrepancies or, on the contrary, to go on compromise alternative. If after careful discussion of features of a problem you can not accept offered yardsticks in quality most eligible, try to subject to their check the third person.

The special attention should be given never to give in to stress. The stress can acquire the different forms: bribes, threat, call-ups to trust or the failure (refusal) is simple to move from a place. In all cases the principal answer same: offer to the interlocutor to pronounce his reasons, offer objective yardsticks and declare, that without this fundamentals you will not advance further.

If other party actually is not shaded slide from a place and does not put forward a convincing fundamentals for the item, then further negotiations be can not. But before to keep this business, you should once again consider, whether you have looked through(missed) any objective yardstick, which one converts the offer of the partners in fair.

If in an item of the partners there is no desire though a few to concede, and you have not found any principal fundamentals that to accept, estimate, that you receive, if agree on their offer instead of addressing to the best alternative.
About the Author
Professional research on organisational issues and matters that importat. While I promote Hoodia Gordonii Plus, I continue to monitor business and marketing metrics in terms of human factor involvement learn more http://www.offshelf.net.
Please Rate:
(Average: Not rated)
Views: 115
Print Email Share
Article Categories