Businesses today tend to extend it businesses beyond domestic borders. For the businesses to be successful there should be negotiations. The biggest problem with the negotiations is that the parties involved are often from different countries with different culture and beliefs. For there to be common ground and for all parties to come to an agreement there must be strategies in place to ensure the success of the negotiation (Moran, Harris, & Moran, 2011).
Negotiation is the process where parties come together to try to reach an agreement on the unresolved situation and to arrive at a common goal. It allows room for communication which enables parties to solve conflicting interests and come to an agreement that benefits all. There are five different styles of negotiation strategies, and they include hard (win-lose strategy), soft (win-win strategy), good cop, bad cop and boulwarism (Lum, 2005). The styles fall in the direct confrontation or indirect confrontation categories.
Direct confrontation
It involves the two parties or more involved in the situation coming face-to-face. Direct confrontation is a type of negotiation that fosters rapport. It leaves no room for misunderstanding. The parties involved have the opportunity to assess each other regarding body language, facial expressions, and cultural attitudes. It assists the parties to be at ease with each other and reduce tension making negotiation easy (Moran, Harris, & Moran, 2011).
The category implements hard, soft and boulwarism strategies. In the hard approach, the negotiator views the circumstance and takes a rigid position until he triumphs. The negotiator will not accept any other terms of negotiation presented by the other party. The soft strategy will put emphasis on maintaining a good relation, and both parties can come up with a compromise. The disadvantage of the soft style is one party can take advantage of the other.
Boulwarism involves a party making an ultimatum for the other party. The party in charge puts the offer on the table and gives the other party time to decide whether it will take the offer or not. It does not involve concession. The strategy is somehow harsh, and if the tender does not favor the other party, there will be no agreement (Lum, 2005).
Indirect confrontations
It involves the use of a third party as a mediator to solve the problem. The mediator has to have the interest of both parties at heart for a solution to come about that will benefit all parties involved. The mediator can originate from either side. The problem of this type of negotiation is communication and information may mislead all involved parties (Moran, Harris, & Moran, 2011).
The category implements good cop, bad cop strategies where the negotiator may choose to be a good cop or a bad cop. The good cop and bad cop strategies are used to enforce bargaining power. The mediator can act like a bad cop; here the offer is hard to stand, and the negotiator will not stray far from it. The offer can be high, and the offer provided by the other party is to come close to what the mediator needed. The good cop is a flexible kind of strategy, not fixed to an offer. He can present a tender and see if the other party is willing to take it, if not they come up with an agreement. There is a disadvantage to this as a party can take advantage of the other (Lum, 2005).
References
Lum, G. (2005). The negotiation fieldbook: Simple strategies to help negotiate everything. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Moran, R. T., Harris, P. R., & Moran, S. V. (2011). Managing cultural differences: Global leadership strategies for cross-cultural business success. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
