1. BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) is a term developed by Roger Fisher and William Ury of the Harvard Negotiation Project. In the absence of a deal, it is the preferred course of action you should take. It's a hefty concept that can make your negotiations more successful, especially when the other side is more powerful and/or has a stronger bargaining position. You negotiate to obtain something from another party that is more valuable than what you get by not negotiating. Knowing your BATNA allows you to understand how much it will cost you if you fail to come to an agreement. For example, if you're a car salesperson who is close to reaching your end-of-month quota (and that trip to Kasane incentive) your cost of not agreeing to a deal propose by a savvy customer will be high. Your BATNA will not be favourable, so you might be more willing to continue negotiations. Knowing your BATNA, instead of guessing what it might be, keeps you from being too optimistic about your alternatives. You might not fully understand the impact of a disgruntled employee who sues your company or an agitated spouse who hotly contests a divorce. It also can help you avoid agreeing too readily because you are uncertain what will happen if negotiations break off. In collective bargaining process, the Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement or BATNA is the course of action that will be taken by a party if the current negotiations fail and an agreement cannot be reached. BATNA is the key focus and the driving force behind a successful negotiator. A party should generally not accept a worse resolution than its BATNA. The BATNA is often seen by negotiators not as a safety net, but rather as a point of leverage in negotiations. BATNA is the choice you can make if you conclude that negotiating with a particular party is not likely to yield a favourable result. You can walk away from a negotiation if your BATNA is better than the likely outcome of that negotiation. BATNA, however, covers far more than that; BATNA can be seen as the measure of the balance of power in a negotiation. If other parties need you in order to reach their objectives, your BATNA is strong; your negotiating circumstances are strong. A party’s BATNA depends on a wide variety of situation-specific factors. By thinking through a BTNA, a party can gain a better understanding of how badly they need an agreement, and what concessions they should make in return for one. Examples of BATNAs
* A union negotiating with an employer over the employer’s final wage offer. BATNA: Declaring a dispute and ultimately striking over the issue. 2. Like most areas of business life, negotiating is a dynamic, moving process which requires a flexible and creative approach if there is a chance of reaching a mutually acceptable solution. One tactical dilemma that negotiators face is ‘who should make the first proposal? Negotiators often allow the other party to go first, in the hope that they might be offered a deal better even than they had hoped for or would have asked for themselves. One of the problems with all negotiations is uncertainty. If they are not sure what you want, what your issues are, what motivates and de motivates you they become suspicious and prone to conspiracy theories, and that makes finding a mutually acceptable outcome harder. Negotiators face such a decision when choosing whether to cooperate or compete. Cooperating in this sense involves staying soft and creating value -- enlarging the pie -- whereas competing involves staying hard and claiming value. When you apply this theory to the Prisoner's Dilemma scenario, cooperating means to keeping quiet, and competing means to confess. The Negotiator's Dilemma states four different scenarios:
1. Great: If you compete and the other cooperates, you will have a great outcome, and the other will have a terrible outcome (the best result for you 2. Good: If both you and the other side decide to lay all cards...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document