Negotiations - it is a business-intercourse to achieve common solutions.
Negotiations take place in the form of a business conversation on issues of interest to both sides, and are establishing cooperation ties.
During the negotiations the people want:
-Achieve mutual agreement on which is usually encountered interests;
Stand-worthy confrontation inevitably arises due to conflicting interests without destroying the relationship.
The talks are intended primarily to help with the mutual exchange of views (in the form of various proposals for the solution of the problem for discussion) "bargain" meets the interests of both parties to reach an agreement and the results that would be acceptable to all participants in the negotiations.
Negotiations are conducted:
-On a particular subject (for example, due to the need to establish cooperative ties);
, Under certain circumstances (for example, a mismatch of interest);
-With a specific purpose (for example, the conclusion of the agreement);
- On certain important issues (political, economic, social or cultural).
Often manage to reach an agreement only after a thorough discussion of the problem, in the course of any negotiations which exhibit different interests, and the partners are passed through the prism of their own needs. A lot of the important role played by the fact, what the benefits (or negative moments) due to partners conclusion of an agreement, especially in the evaluation of new nominated only in the course of negotiations, the options are solutions.
All negotiations require careful preparation: the more intense they are carried out (with the use of analyzes, calculations of economic benefit, conclusions, etc.), the greater the chances of success.
Negotiations as a method of conflict resolution is a set of tactics aimed at finding a mutually acceptable solution to the conflicting parties.
To negotiations were possible, it is necessary to fulfill certain conditions:
the interdependence of the parties involved in the conflict;
no significant differences in the capabilities (strength) of the subjects of the conflict;
appropriate stages of the conflict negotiation capabilities;
participation in the negotiations of the parties, which can actually make decisions in the circumstances.
Every conflict in its development goes through several stages.
Stages of development of the conflict
The possibility of negotiations
tension
disagreement
conduct negotiations early, not all components of the conflict were defined
rivalry, hostility
Negotiations are rational
aggressiveness
negotiations with a third party
violence
hostilities
negotiations are not possible, suitable response aggression
It is believed that it is appropriate to negotiate only with those forces that have the power in this situation and can affect the outcome of the event. Several groups whose interests are affected by the conflict:
primary groups - their personal interests are affected, they are themselves involved in the conflict, but not always from these groups is the possibility of successful negotiation,
Secondary groups - their interests are affected, but those forces do not want open expression of their interest, their actions are hidden until a certain time. There may be also a third force is also interested in the conflict, but even more hidden.
Properly organized negotiations are consistently several steps:
Preparation for the start of negotiations (prior to the opening of negotiations);
pre-selected position (initial statement issued by their position in these negotiations);
search for mutually acceptable solutions (psychological struggle, the establishment of the real position of opponents);
completion (exit of the crisis or the negotiation deadlock).
Getting ready to start negotiations (the first stage). Before the beginning of any negotiation is extremely important to be well prepared for them: to diagnose the state of affairs, to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the parties to the conflict, to predict the balance of power, find out who will negotiate and interests of any of the groups they represent.
In addition to collecting information at this stage is to articulate a goal of participating in the negotiations. In this regard, it should answer the following questions:
what is the main purpose of the meeting?
what are the alternatives available? Actual negotiations are to achieve results that would be the most desirable and acceptable;
If no agreement is reached, as it will affect the interests of both sides?
what is the interdependence of opponents and how it is expressed externally?
Also worked procedural questions: where better to negotiate what kind of atmosphere at the talks is expected to be important in the future if a good relationship with your opponent?
Experienced negotiators believe that by this stage, if it is properly organized, up to 50% depends on the success of all further activities.
The second phase of the negotiations - the initial selection of the position (the official statements of the negotiators). This stage allows for two purposes participants in the negotiation process: show their opponents that their interests known to you and you take them into account, to determine the room for maneuver and try to leave it as it is possible more space for themselves.
Typically, negotiations begin with statements by both sides about their desires and interests. With the help of the facts and arguments of principle (for example, "the problem of" "common interest"), the parties are trying to consolidate their positions.
If negotiations are held with the participation of a mediator (leader, negotiator), it must give each side an opportunity to speak and to do everything in his power to opponents do not interrupt each other.
Furthermore, the master determines the factors deter parties and operates them: the time allowed on the issues discussed, the consequences of the inability to reach a compromise. Suggests ways of decision-making: a simple majority consensus. Defines the procedural issues.
The third round of talks is to find a mutually acceptable solution, psychological struggle.
At this stage, the parties identify each other's capabilities, how much real requirements of each party and how their performance can affect the interests of the other party. Opponents are facts, favorable only to them, claim they have all kinds of alternatives. Here are various manipulations and psychological pressure on the lead, seize the initiative in all possible ways. The goal of each of the participants - to achieve balance or small domination.
The mediator's goal at this stage - to see and operate the possible combinations of interests of participants contribute to a large number of possible solutions, to direct talks in the channel search of specific proposals. In the event that negotiations start to get edgy character, grazing one of the parties, the master must find a way out of the situation.
The fourth stage - the completion of negotiations and resolve the impasse.
By this stage, there is already a significant number of different options and proposals, but the agreement on them has not yet been reached. Time starts running out, increasing the tension required to take any decision. Several recent concessions made by both parties, can save the situation. But it is important for the parties clearly remember what concessions do not affect the achievement of the main objective, and which nullify all previous work.
The presiding officer, using the given him power to regulate past differences and leads the parties to compromise.
13. Managing emotions in the conflict styles of behavior involved in the conflict.
When analyzing conflicts must be borne in mind that the level of orientation in its own interests or opponent depends on three factors:
contents of the subject of the conflict;
the value of interpersonal relationships;
individual psychological characteristics of the individual.
A special place in the evaluation of models and strategies of individual behavior in the conflict is of value to her interpersonal relationships with the opposing party. If one of the players interpersonal relationships with others (friendship, love, partnership, partnership, etc.) are of no value, and that his conduct in the conflict will be different content or destructive extremes in the strategy (coercion, poverty, competition) . Conversely, the value of interpersonal relationships to the subject of conflict interaction, as a rule, is a significant cause of constructive behavior in the conflict or orientation of such behavior on the compromise, cooperation, care or concession.
The conflict in the workplace - this is deliberate contradiction between communicating members of the team, which is accompanied by attempts to solve it on the background of emotional relationships. There are five main strategies of conflict resolution: the strategy of competition, adaptation, avoidance, compromise and cooperation. The basis of the system is laid, which is called by Thomas - Kilmeny. The method was developed by KU Thomas and AD Kilmeny in 1972.
Style competition, rivalry may use a person with a strong will, sufficient authority, the power is not very interested in co-operation with the other side and eager to first satisfy their own interests. It can be used if:
the outcome of the conflict is very important to you and you make a big bet on his solution to the problem;
have the power and authority and it is clear to you that your proposed solution - the best;
feel that you have no choice and you have nothing to lose;
have to take an unpopular decision and you have enough power to select this step;
interact with subordinates, preferring an authoritarian style.
However, it should be borne in mind that this is not the style that can be used in close personal relationships, because in addition to feelings of alienation he did no longer be able to call. It is also not appropriate to use in a situation where you do not have enough power, and your point of view on an issue at odds with the views of the chief.
Style of cooperation can be helpful when protecting their own interests, you have to take into account the needs and desires of the other party. This style is most difficult as it requires a continuous operation. The purpose of its application - development of a long-term mutually beneficial solutions. This style requires the ability to explain their desire to listen to each other, to restrain their emotions. The absence of one of these factors makes this style ineffective. To resolve the conflict, this style can be used in the following situations:
need to find a common solution, if each of the approaches to the problem is important and does not allow for trade-offs;
you have a long-lasting, durable and interdependent relationship with the other party;
the main goal is the acquisition of joint work experience;
parties can listen to each other and express the essence of their interests;
necessary to integrate the perspectives and gain personal involvement of employees in the business.
Style compromise. Its essence lies in the fact that the parties shall endeavor to settle disputes by mutual concessions. In this regard, it is somewhat reminiscent of the style of cooperation, but carried out on a more superficial level, as part of something inferior to each other. This style is most effective, both parties want the same, but knows that it is impossible simultaneously. For example, the desire to take the same position or the same room to work. When using this style emphasis is not on the solution that meets the interests of both parties, and on the form, which can be expressed in the words: "We can not completely fulfill their desires, therefore, need to come to a decision, which each of us would agree" .
Such an approach to conflict resolution can be used in the following situations:
both sides have equally persuasive arguments and have the same power;
satisfaction of your desire is for you not too high;
You can arrange a temporary solution, because there is no time to work out the other, or whether other approaches to the problem have been ineffective;
compromise will allow you to get something than lose everything.
Style evasion is usually implemented by the affected problem is not so important to you, you do not assert your rights, do not cooperate with anybody for a decision and do not want to spend the time and effort to solve it. This style is also recommended in cases where one party has more power or feels wrong, or believes that there are no grounds to continue the contacts.
Style evasion can be recommended for use in the following situations:
source of disagreement is trivial and inconsequential to you compared to other more important tasks, but because you think it's not worth it to spend on power;
you know that you can not or do not want to solve the issue in their favor;
you have little power to address the desirable way for you;
would gain the time to study the situation and get more information before making a decision;
try to solve the problem immediately dangerous, because the disclosure and open discussion of the conflict can only worsen the situation;
subordinate themselves can successfully resolve the conflict;
you have had a difficult day, and the solution to this problem is to bring more trouble.
We should not think that this style is running away from the problem or lack of accountability. In fact, care or respite may well be appropriate in response to a conflict situation, because in the meantime it can be resolved by itself, or you can do it later when you have enough information and a desire to solve it.
Style accessories oznachat that you are acting in conjunction with the other side, but do not try to defend their own interests in order to smooth the atmosphere and restore the normal working environment. Thomas and Kilmeny believe that this style is most effective when the outcome of the case is extremely important to the other side and not very important to you or the code you sacrifice their own interests for the benefit of the other party.
Lifestyle device can be applied to the next most typical situations:
the most important task - the restoration of peace and stability, not the resolution of the conflict;
subject of disagreement is not important to you or you do not particularly care what happened;
feel that you need to maintain good relations with other people than defend their own point of view;
realize that the truth is not on your side;
feel that you have enough power or chance to win.
In the same way, no matter how one style of leadership can not be effective in all the cases, and none of the examined styles of conflict resolution can not be selected as the best. We must learn how to effectively use each of them and consciously make a particular choice, given the circumstances.
References
1. Andreeva GM, Social Psychology. - M., 1980.
2. V. Boyko, A. Kovalev, Panferov VN, social and psychological climate of the team and lichnost.-M.: Thought, 1983.
3. Vasylyuk FE, Life experience (analysis of overcoming critical situations).-M.: Mosk. University Press, 1984.
4. Grishin, NV Social and psychological conflicts and improve relationships in the team. / / Social and psychological problems of the production team / Ed. Shorokhova EV - Moscow, 1983.
5. Dontcov AI, Psychology kollektiva.-M.: Mosk. University Press, 1984.
6. Ershov, AA, and collective identity: Interpersonal conflicts in the team, their resolution. - L., 1976.
7. Parigin BD, socio-psychological climate of the collective: the ways and methods of study. / Ed. VA Yadova. - Leningrad, Publishing House of the "Science".
8. Scott DG, Conflicts ways to overcome them / Vneshtorgizdat,-Kiev,
No comments:
Post a Comment