Negotiation Skills Self-assessment

Correct answer is E. When your client is grumpy, their emotions will inevitably cloud their judgment and make it difficult for you to interact with them on substantive matters. At the same time, if they are experiencing anger, it is important for you to validate for them that you understand that they are upset. By acknowledging your client's anger and offering your assistance, your client will feel as though you are on the "same side" and treat you as a friend and continue to direct their anger elsewhere- allowing you to focus on the substantive issues at hand.

Answer B. The physiotherapy company is trying to get you started on the traditional positional bargaining philosophy of "start high, counter low, end up in the middle." To avoid this game, you need to change the focus of the negotiations. In order to counter their attempts at positional bargaining, you should begin by asking them what the basis for their initial price was. This tactic will draw attention away from the initial price and create a focus on the criteria for determining a fair price. Next, you should suggest a price of your own, substantiate the offer with appropriate criteria and stick to your offer.

Correct answer A: One of the most powerful tools in negotiation is how you listen to what the other party is saying. Very often, we are too focused on the points we are trying to get across to be able to listen to what our counterparts are trying to say. If your significant other is repeating themselves, they are subconsciously sending you a signal that they feel that what they are saying is important and they want you to acknowledge that you have heard and understand them. This is especially true if you are having the same argument over and over again. In personal relationships, in particular, we tend to set aside our differences without actually resolving them- which is why the argument keeps repeating itself. The best thing to do in this situation is to rephrase what they keep repeating and ask them if you have accurately restated their point. Once they feel as though they have been heard, only then will they be able to listen to you. Once both parties have actually heard and understood each other, you will both then be able to talk with each other instead of at each other.

B and E: Relationships with peers and superiors at work are often complicated by the stress of the work environment and the constant evaluation of a person's value as compared to expectations other people have of them. In this case, you really don't know why your boss is singling you out for criticism. She may be particularly upset with you or she may be upset in general due to personal circumstances or you may even be imagining the whole thing. Any time you don't have complete information or you are relying heavily on untested assumptions, your first job is to secure more information to help you make an accurate assessment of the situation. The LAST thing you want to do in such a situation is make any accusations about a person's intent or character- no matter what the truth is you will not gain what you seek.

By asking her whether or not you have done something wrong, you are giving her every opportunity to apologize in case there is nothing wrong. If she actually is concerned about your performance, then your invitation to tell you what the problem is will catch her off-guard and, as a consequence, she will likely let you know what the problem in a reciprocally polite manner. By writing down what you feel your responsibilities are deflects the pressure of the situation from the two of you personally to the piece of paper you have written the responsibilities on.

A and C: You have been seeking greater responsibility at work for quite a while and a position just opened up at your company that you think would be perfect for you. While you are confident you can do the job, you are lacking one of the credentials upper management is seeking in filling the position. How do you ask for the position?

A,B, C, D: In any negotiation where significant risk is involved, the parties involved bombard each other with proposals and other documentation in addition to having to attend numerous meetings. In the process, each party is constantly trying to obtain and maintain the upper hand in the negotiations. A common tactic in this regard is to propose a set of terms and conditions and then propose discussing them as soon as possible. In order to counteract this, there are several things that would be advisable- in the following order: First, before the actual meeting, you should analyze their proposal thoroughly, even if it means delaying the date and/or time of the meeting itself. In particular, you must first explain what you believe to be their reasons for each of their individual proposed provisions.

Finally, it is critical that you have an agenda for the meeting. This allows you to dictate the anticipated flow of negotiations. Failure to have a formalized agenda will result in a disorganized approach to the important issues and create immense room for emotional issues getting in the way of the resolution of substantive issues.