Approaches To Achieve Agreement

Sometimes the right strategy is even to reduce the scope of the agreement. A traditional negotiation consultation involves carefully evaluating (and improving) your BATNA. The problem is that in most high-stakes negotiations, there is really no viable alternative to an agreement with the other side. In such scenarios, it is essential to immerse yourself more deeply in the batna analysis. The key is not simply to consider wholesale alternatives to an agreement with a powerful counterparty, but to explore alternatives to certain elements of what you are looking for through this agreement. There are often ways to change the scope of an agreement and achieve better results. The Mutual Gains (MGA) approach to negotiation is a process model based on experimental knowledge and hundreds of real cases[1][3][5][5][5][6], which defines four steps to negotiate better outcomes while protecting relationships and reputation. A central principle of the model and the robust theory behind it is that a large majority of negotiations in the real world involve parties who have more than a purpose or a single concern in mind and who are more than an issue that can be addressed in the agreement they conclude. The model allows the parties to improve their chances of reaching an agreement that is superior to existing alternatives. Sanchez-Anguix V, Julian V, Botti V, Garcia-Fornes A (2012) Unanimity within agent-based trading teams with linear and monotonous utility functions. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B 42 (3):778-792 This trading approach is also called a collaborative or value-creating approach. It is superior to all negotiating avenues.

As a result, both parties feel they are getting what they wanted. The result is satisfaction from each other. It has the following characteristics. Understanding the other side`s interests and tactics is an essential element of good negotiations. Choosing a strategy that best suits their interests and tactics will help you get the best result. Follow the future and its solutions. Parties that are about to end difficult negotiations – or those who will pass on the agreement to others to implement it – often forget to strengthen the agreement by imagining things that could derail it or create future conflicts or uncertainties. [23] [24] [25] There are four different approaches to negotiations and the outcome of the negotiations depends on the approach. The different approaches to negotiation are as follows: in this article, we introduce a new paradigm to achieve pareto optimally in group decision-making processes: bottom-up approaches to the optimality of the pareto.

It is based on the idea that individuals can resolve a conflict within a group, but trust some members more than others; therefore, they may be willing to cooperate and share more information with these members.