The Paris Peace Talk Negotiations
The Paris negotiations were long and involved many parties. There were the United States, the Soviet Union, North Vietnam, and South Vietnam. The aim of the negotiations was to end a war between North Vietnam and South Vietnam, which had been in existence for a very long time. My main role was negotiating for the North Vietnam side. The negotiation process was intense with each side putting its demands on the table. Our negotiation team laid out the following demands as was expected of us as representatives of North Vietnam. First, we agreed that it was important to keep our military in South Vietnam until the United States withdrew its forces. The reason behind this move was to show our military strength and our anger towards the United States and South Vietnam. Secondly, we were required to ensure that the negotiations proceeded in a fast manner, especially before the selection of the next United States president. Another task that was bestowed on us for negotiation was the release of our president and the removal of the South Vietnamese president from power. The demands were difficult, and we faced a lot of opposition from the other sides of the negotiation table. However, we remained focused and went ahead to present our interest in the whole process (Lewicki, Barry, & Saunders, 2011). We agreed that unifying Vietnam was important, and we should negotiate in a way that leads to this achievement. While negotiating for a united Vietnam, we agreed that it was important that the negotiations are fast and that the North Vietnam troops remain in Vietnam. The decision to keep our troops in South Vietnam was a show of our military strength and save face. We did not want to portray our country as a coward in front of the super powers.
The negotiation process was really difficult. Each side laid out its interest and opinions regarding the matter making it hard to come to solutions that were mutually accepted by all the teams (Lewicki et al., 2016). The team included four parties and a briefing on the matter that was to be discussed. Later, all the four parties presented their interests. South Vietnam desired North Vietnam and America to withdraw their forces from their land, as they believed they were a sovereign nation whose force was capable of guarding. However, as the representatives of North Vietnam, we were against such a solution. Therefore, when I presented my interest that I would not withdraw my force, South Vietnam was angered by this decision even threatening to walk out of the negotiation table. However, the United States intervened and emphasized the need to focus on the most important aspects of the negotiation; a ceasefire and the unification of Vietnam. Russia also advocated for the unification of Vietnam because it would benefit greatly by spreading its communist ideologies. Overall, the negotiation process had both advantages and disadvantages for my side (Lewicki et al., 2016). First, everyone agreed on the need of unifying Vietnam and a ceasefire. Additionally, all sides agreed it was necessary to release the political prisoners because keeping them as prisoners fuelled the war. On the disadvantage, my interest of keeping the military in South Vietnam was not successful as it received opposition from all sides of the negotiation table including the US that agreed to withdraw its forces too so as to achieve a lasting solution.
The negotiation was an eye opener. It helped me learn about the great negotiation skills I possess. I discovered that I have a great ability to withhold anger and view things from a different perspective that does not involve throwing nasty words at other people. Additionally, the negotiation helped me learn a great deal from other involved parties. First, I learnt that good listening skills are important in arriving at an amicable solution when presented with a big problem as was my case (Lewicki et al., 2016). Secondly, I learnt that patience is important in helping provide a lasting solution to a problem.
The role of communication in the process
Various aspects of verbal and non-verbal communication played a significant role in the negotiation process. Non-verbal communication was useful in conveying the feelings of the different parties involved in the negotiation. Some examples of non-verbal communication techniques used were facial gestures and hand and body movement (Ury, 1993). Facial gestures helped the participants read the mind of the people involved in the process. Hand and body movements, on the other hand, were used to illustrate certain aspects that could not be conveyed using any other means (Lewicki et al., 2016). An example is showing illustrations of the importance of peace between North and South Vietnam. Verbal communication was incorporated in the process through the use of various techniques such as note taking.
Throughout the negotiation process, every party exercised some levels of self-control meaning that no party exercised too much power over the other. The process involved turn-taking with each side being assigned an equal chance to present its views (Lewicki et al., 2016). Every team tried to maintain a clear mind during the negotiation so as to avoid any form of bias. However, sometime during the negotiations, emotions were high especially upon proposing that the North Vietnam military would remain in the South. I believe this suggestion annoyed the representatives of South Vietnam in a great way.
Ethical consideration
Ethics constitute an important part of any negotiation process. Good ethical practices ensure negotiation parties arrive at an amicable solution without coming to blows or insults. Throughout the negotiation process, no unethical behavior was witnessed. All parties played their roles in a decent manner making the whole process successful despite the different opinions that were presented (Lewicki et al., 2016). All the parties recognized the importance of the negotiation in settling a longtime conflict and the fact that such a negotiation involved interests of many parties hence remained disciplined in all their undertakings.
The class notes and readings helped a great deal in the negotiation process. Throughout the process, we applied the different concepts learned in class such as the win-win situation where every party managed to achieve one of their demands. The negotiations were helpful in clarification of certain aspects. It helped me recognize that negotiations are difficult, tedious, and at times long processes that require the attentive listening without building any bias (Lewicki et al., 2016). Secondly, the negotiation helped me learn that in a negotiation, all demands matter, and there is a need to address them before making a conclusion.
Personal assessment
The negotiations played a significant role in enhancing my skills in a negotiation table. I learnt a lot of things that can be helpful in my future negotiations. After the negotiations, I discovered that not all demands are met; some need to be compromised to arrive at a solution that favors every party. Additionally, I learn that communication is an important tool for the negotiation party (Lewicki et al., 2016). It helps the members involved present their ideas in an organized and systematic manner. Additionally, the negotiations helped me identify my weak points, putting in a better position to stay focused in future negotiations. Therefore, the negotiations have helped me grow as a person, and I can acknowledge some facts I used to ignore before.
World Trade Centre Redevelopment Negotiations
The negotiations constituted five parties. They were the state, the city, the developer, the insurer, and the families of the 3,000 victims of the attack. The negotiations were short but detailed. Each party made its presentations on their expectation to facilitate the negotiation process. My role in the negotiation was the state. As a representative of the state, the redevelopment was important because the two buildings generated a lot of revenue. The first person to open the negotiation process was the developer who reminded us of the facts involved, including the financial cost of building both the memorial site and the commercial development. As a representative of the state, I made these demands. Considering the importance of the commercial development of the state, I stated that it was necessary to allocate an average of 12 acres for commercial development and 5 acres for a memorial site. The second choice I presented was that 15acres be allocated to commercial development while the remaining 2 acres for a memorial site if the families of the victims agreed. However, anything less than was considered inappropriate since both the commercial development and memorial site constituted an important part of the people of New York. The second proposal was about the amount of money available for the project. I made two proposals; that the total money available for commercial development would be $4B and $500M for the memorial site or $6B for commercial development of $1B for the memorial site. Additionally, I proposed that the construction should begin soonest possible because the site was an important commercial development and the longer the groundbreaking was delayed, the more revenues would be lost.
The negotiations were short and intense. Every party was actively involved so as to come up with a suitable solution. During the negotiations, I learnt a great deal about myself. I discovered that I was an assertive person, driven largely by the desire to achieve a set goal (Ury, 1993). I also learnt that I was patient with the ability to listen to every point presented keenly before presenting a possible solution (Lewicki et al., 2016). Also, the participation of the other teams helped me to learn a lot from them. They all exercised patience and self-control during the whole process despite the challenges they faced. Additionally, listening was a critical skill that was utilized in the negotiations to avoid lengthy discussions and come up with an amicable solution that could fit all the parties involved.
Various aspects of verbal and non-verbal communication were used. For example, the presentations that occurred utilized verbal form of communication (Lewicki et al., 2016). On the other hand, non-verbal communication aspects were used in the gestures and facial expressions exchanged. For example, a nod was a form of agreement between all the parties that participated. Hand gestures were used in the illustration of the plan diagram of the site.
Power was not equally exercised through the negotiation. The state as the owner of the construction site exercised a lot of power in the negotiation process. However, all parties were encouraged to present their views allowing the negotiation process to proceed smoothly.
The negotiation process was smooth, and every party involved avoided bias and any form of discrimination (Ury, 1993). The matter relating to the memorial site was taken as sensitive, and all the parties that participated in the negotiation ensured that their views corresponding to the matter did not contain any tone of disrespect for the people who lost their loved ones during the attack.
Ethical Concerns
The negotiation process was smooth without many hitches. There were no ethical concerns that emerged, and all parties paid much interest in the matter because of its importance. Every party was honest and presented honest opinions during the negotiation. According to Uri (1993), various ethical virtues should be considered during a negotiation process. Of utmost importance is honesty openness to ideas. When all the negotiating parties achieve this, the whole process is guaranteed to come up with solutions that agreeable to everyone (Ury, 1993).
The lecture notes and various concepts of negotiation were used. Integration played a big role in the negotiation process. Every party was given an opportunity to present its views and possible solutions to the predicament. After the presentation of the views, discussions began to ascertain the best solutions to pick regarding the problem.
Personal assessment
I realized that negotiation is a process that requires participation from the parties involved through the role play. Role play gave me the opportunity to distinguish between an effective negotiation and an ineffective one. I have also learnt that an effective negotiation requires an individual to be honest. Honesty is key in every negotiation and in a case where one party is not honest; the negotiation process may collapse (Ury, 1993). Another important lesson I learnt from the role play was that in a negotiation, every party involved should be given a chance to air his/her opinion. The feeling of being given time to express oneself instills self-confidence in an individual. The negotiation experience made me aware of how real-life negotiations look like and the considerations one should make during the negotiations.
In conclusion, I am working on several ways of being a good negotiator by considering the aspects that were evident during the role play negotiation. The process availed to me the components of negotiations. I was also able to identify good and bad negotiations. Currently, I am considering implementing and practicing all the good components of negotiation that I learnt during the process to become a good negotiator. I care about what other people may think about me as a negotiator, and that is the reason I want to embrace perfection in the negotiation process. I would prefer more role-play negotiations to perfect my skills in the negotiation process.
References
Lewicki, R., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. (2016).Essentials of Negotiation. (6th ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Ury, W. (1993).Getting Past No.Negotiating in Difficult Situations.New York: Bantam Books.
