Negotiation in Conflict Resolution
Conflicts are everyday occurrences in life, and people use various strategies to resolve them while maintaining their relationships. One commonly used conflict resolution strategy is negotiation which is defined as a process of settling differences whereby the conflicting parties reach a point of compromise or agreement. During negotiation, the involved parties typically attack each other’s unattainable demands and then progressively concede to a comprise situation that each accepts. The conflicting parties agree to talk to each other to find a working solution.
One significant benefit of negotiation conflict resolution strategy is that it clarifies a problem. When people opt to talk about the issues between them, they can air out perceptions and views. The contrasting views bring about a better understanding of the issue at hand, which may help formulate a working solution (Sandole & Pruitt, 2015). Negotiation conflict resolution strategy helps in maintaining relationships. During a negotiation, the conflicting parties share their opinions, and when they objectively discuss these ideals, they understand each other better, this maintains relationships.
Negotiation conflict resolution strategy brings about new and innovative breakthroughs and approaches to dealing with issues. When people intentionally share their points of view, they can learn from each other. The resultant feature is that they learn new approaches to resolving problems. Additionally, while conflicts may be perceived as negative issues, involvement can sharpen people’s capacity to bargain, influence, or compete in conflicting situations. One successfully comes out of a conflict better, wiser, and equipped with skills to solve issues.
Conflict resolution can occur in two different approaches, namely, competitive and collaborative negotiation. Competitive negotiation, also commonly referred to as hard bargaining, is whereby either of the conflicting parties gives nothing but demands for everything (Sandole & Pruitt, 2015). It is whereby either of the arguing parties demands to win even at the expense of the other person’s needs and interests. The approach is mainly applied when one is facing a weaker negotiator, but it is least appropriate in situations where a long-term relationship needs to be maintained or when the opponents are adequately prepared.
An example of a time I successfully applied the competitive negotiation approach was when we were assigned a task in groups. The other two members proposed that we meet in the evenings, which I negated because I don’t appreciate getting home late. I insisted that we meet on Saturday mornings and said that we would have ample time, fresh minds, and multiple meeting venue options. We all agreed to meet on Saturdays.
Collaborative negotiation also referred to as soft bargaining, is whereby trust and kindness are applied to minimize conflict. The parties involved look for a common ground to settle their differences. The interests of both parties are considered for everyone’s benefit. Each of the parties comprises either wholly or in part.
An example of a time I applied collaborative negotiation is when my friend and I were looking for a venue for a holiday. I proposed that we go camping in the mountains while my friend suggested staying at a beach house on the coast. We analyzed each option, and we seemed to never get to a conclusion. Eventually, we agreed to go camping at a famous hill near the coast. Each of us was satisfied, and we successfully had a chance to enjoy our holiday.
References
Sandole, D., & Pruitt, D. (2015). Handbook of conflict analysis and resolution. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Leave a Reply