David D. Kaspars Blog

"Personal, Useful, Skuriles and Everyday from my world as an Executive Coach and leadership Trainer"

| 7. January 2015 | To learn negotiating skills

Tit for Tat

Should executives to cooperate? Or you should generally be suspicious? Should managers be proactive "with the saber rattling?" Or does it belong to Führungsjob, unconditionally trust to donate? the

From the well-known  Gefangenedilemma" can be insightful principles can be derived. But lets start at the beginning...

"Two perpetrators of a serious Crime, to be arrested and separately interrogated. Since there is no Tatzeugen, only the confession is at least an offender for convictions of both perpetrators. Admits only one perpetrator, he goes due to a...

... leniency policy is free from the process out, while his accomplices to the full extent of the law hits (10 years imprisonment).

they both Admit that the perpetrator, you will get 8 years in prison because of mitigating circumstances.

Admits none, are both only because of illegal possession of arms to one year in prison.

The payouts, so the "result" of the game for each player or prisoners, are in negative Gefängnisjahren measured.

it can be seen that the players very well, if both the act of denying it. Because of the leniency notice, however, have both an incentive, the act of confess. the

A confession is even independent from the receive of the other for each of the two prisoners to be beneficial. This leads to the overall worst result (16 years imprisonment).

Optimal behavior = Tit for Tat
political scientist and mathematician Robert Axelrod has iterierte computer simulations to this prisoner's dilemma develops. In such iterated Play, eliminates the Moment of the lack of knowledge about the behavior of the other. In the simulations shows that the easiest and most successful of all programs "Tit for Tat" was.

This looks like the first player focuses on cooperation and then each does what the other players at the train already has done: to Cooperate or defektieren (= not cooperate).

Axelrod proposes four Imperatives as pointing the way for an optimal decision-making behavior:


1.       do not Be envious of the success of others!
2.       Defektiere not first!
3.       Reply to both cooperation as well as Defektion!
4.       don't Be too clever!


imperative 1 - don't Be too jealous!
To imperative one to understand, it is a good idea as opposed to Nullsummenspielen to illustrate a point. While chess is a zero-sum game, in which one of the will lose if the other wins, for life does not claim. Both sides can be good or poor performance. People tend to have a Benchmark to create, in this case, the success of the other in comparison to their own success and in order to establish a competitive relationship.

This comparison using an external Ruler leads to envy. The  try this envy by the correction of the advantage of the other, to meet, in the prisoner's dilemma only by Defektion achieve. Since Defektion but only to further Defektion leads, does envy is self-defeating.

The strategy Tit for Tat is not successful, that a the other defeated, but by the achievement of a Situation, it both allows you to do well.

Accordingly, you have to be in a Situation that is not as Nullsummenwelt designed is not better than another, to do well: "It doesn't matter if everyone is as good as you or even a little better, as long as you cut off!"

imperative 2 - Defektiere not first!
imperative, two points to the advantage of sustainability. If it is also promising in the short term may appear not to cooperate, in the long run, exactly the opposite is achieved and even the environment is destroyed, the one for our own success is needed.

as Long as the other cooperates, you should also cooperate. But what now, if the other is not cooperating? You should also "turn the other cheek?" This question is answered, imperative three.


imperative 3 - Reply to cooperation and Defektion!
You risk being exploited, if you do not Defektion on Defektion follow, on the other hand, one risks but also an escalation, if you have a Defektion the other hand, with more than a own Defektion answered.

It shows that it is better to be a provocation quick to reply. The longer Defektionen with impunity tolerated will, the more likely it attracts the other party to the conclusion that this could cash out and the harder it is to this pattern leave again.

Provozierbarkeit is dangerous, as retaliation to an endless sequence of mutual Defektion could escalate. Axelrod advises to moderate Provozierbarkeit. The stability of the cooperation will thus be strengthened, if the reaction is somewhat less than the provocation.

imperative 4 - Is not to reflect!
In Nullsummenspielen like chess, it is extremely effective, his opponent strategically to unsettle. Differently it looks with Verteilungsspielen without winners and Losers.

There are it is important, to others it is your Intention by a simple Verhaltensstrategie to be identified. This is your own behavior, however complex, it is for the other inscrutable and leads to messy escalating conditions, which in the end is a sensible cooperation to prevent.

 

| 3. June 2013 | To learn negotiating skills

Basic principles of the Harvard Negotiation concept

Negotiating is an Everyday thing!
children have to negotiate and want your personal goal quickly realize. The daughter wants more pocket money, couples negotiate, if different ideas about the resort are etc Although negotiations are an important part of our everyday life is it often lacks the competence, in as short time as possible viable solutions.

Bazaar method, Harvard method
are Generally well-known two by means of negotiation. On the one hand, there is also the option of haggling (Bazaar method), in which the two parties are in a mostly inflated price to start, and then successively on a for both parties reasonably acceptable price to some. The other way is the hard Position: It insists a party on your fixed idea. Either, the idea is accepted by the other party or the negotiation fails (Hard-Position method). There are not only these two ways! Helpful is the third way, which is also called a negotiation of the Interessensausgleichs is known. This practice is highly successful model worldwide as the Harvard Negotiation project known. Illustratively the following example:  

Two sisters, Monika (14) and Sabine (12) are in the kitchen and argue to an Orange. The mother is added. What will you do? It will probably be the Orange take, and middle parts. The question is whether this solution is optimal. An alternative approach is for the mother would be in the interests of the two to question. Monika may need only the peel of the Orange to make a cake to bake. Sabine wants only a juice presses – With an exact division of the Orange would be two only half served!

The Harvard concept
The Harvard concept is a fundamental distinction between two communication layers. On the one hand, the thematic level (i.e. the level of the negotiated Agreement itself) and on the other hand, the level of the Verhandlungsweise (Meta-level). This leads to the following principles:

  1. people and issues / problems separately treat (Hard in the thing – "soft" with respect to the integrity of the people)
  2. evaluation of the common Interests of the parties Involved and not fixation on the striking communicated initial position (such As by the parties is best served?)
  3. development of as many options ("enlarge the cake" – Creative Brainstorming)
  4. the Common Definition of objective evaluation criteria and Entscheidungsprinzipien for Checking the quality of the result (Eg. ethical or legal standards)

Definition of a BATNA
The Harvard method discourages bad Instruments. During the trial, less in "Abschlussdruck" to come, will do so before the hearing a personal Alternative (Best Alternativ) outside of a hypothetical agreement (Negotiation Agreement). The effective negotiation offer is now during the negotiations with the private Alternative are compared. Based on this comparison, the offer is then accepted or rejected.

- Hypothetically accept the claims of the opposing party according to the spoken evaluate, and the unacceptable consequences explain
- The Verhandlungspartei ask for advice on how to deal with the inconvenience handle
- the involvement of an independent third party,

dealing with pressure and Tricks
- Tricks in negotiations to immediately appeal to you, the Wind from the sails to take. For example: "The sun seems to me in the face. I would like to change the room.“

- to break off negotiations - to the Opposite, on a factual Verhandlungsart return. Here you can Verhandlungsart itself become a subject of bargaining.

- constant personal attacks by a Verhandlungspartners can be a skillful Dodge these attacks and simultaneous references to factual aspects of the negotiations at this level.

- pressure, threat Verhandlungsabbruch (BATNA!) or Judo

 

David Kaspar | 8. August 2011 | To learn negotiating skills

Mental Learn Negotiating Skills

tips "Mental learn negotiating skills"
A good to learn negotiating skills has focused not only on the Tools & Tricks. It is always important the mental preparation. the
the
Listed below are several ideas to interior settings in the context of a conscious mental preparation are set forth.

the
Download the document "Mental learn negotiating skills"
the
the
10 TIPS FOR MENTAL learn negotiating skills
the
1. See negotiation as an opportunity!
Conflicts of interests are basically anything Negative. They play in our complex and interconnected world, an important role. The white mostly Towards her. Successful negotiator to see the divergence in opinions as positive challenges. Negative emotions compared to the act of hearing (as, for example, Fears and nervousness) have a negative effect on the negotiation situation. Imagine, therefore, the negotiation situation as positive. Even if you think you bad cards to have, you should never forget that even in your eyes "overpowering" negotiating partner you need. Otherwise he was not at the negotiating table!
the
2. Check your setting for the negotiator
The fact that you are negotiating on other goals as she pursues it, does not mean that the opponent needs to see. Instead of saying "The type does not fit me", focus on the questions "What can I do to mutual trust to promote?" and "What shall we discuss?". The clarification of the question, who is at the negotiating table is often a negotiation, in the you a lot about the setting of the Verhandlungspartners towards them.
the
3. Accept your emotions in the negotiation situation
Often we see in the case of negotiations under pressure to succeed. Then, we are mostly dünnhäutiger than we would like. Successful negotiator are authentic people. You accept your emotions and go with it adequately. Because: to show emotion is always better, rather than to exclude them. Who has the courage, to its emotional appeal, can also those of his counterpart's easier to accept. Allow each other to let off steam – this can be without charge to happen. Honesty and openness in the relationship to promote mutual respect.
the
4. Check your assumptions – "The map is not the territory!"
Everyone has their own subjective reality (internal map), which for him is true and correct. As Bargaining we tend to our perception as the only correct view.

Rather than in advance of a trial, their own point of view as alone valid to consider, and those of the negotiating parties to ignore or devalue it, it is wiser, from the outset, with the idea of befriending, Opposite to the situation is different and judged. If you succeed, the other point of view to accept it is easy for them to fall, this not as an attack against you.
the
5. Clarify your own interests – What do you really want to?
Instead of already in the run-up to an Extreme Position to stiffen them in the event of a Zurückbuchstabierens only loss of face enters, it is wise to extensively, with their own interests to deal with. Write your interests and try to weights. Where there could be common ground, where conflicts? Keep in mind, prior to any hearing on the current interests of the other party only speculate, but there are always untested assumptions.
the
6. They look for similarities
No negotiation without common interests! It's worth it, already in the preparation aware for possible similarities to find, because most dominate areas of conflict in our Thinking and hinder constructive approaches. Alone the attempt, the personal and factual aspects as far as possible separately to treat a common interest. Even a comment like "We agree that we disagree" can be a reassurance on the level of relationships and a clear head to make for constructive Thinking.
the
7. Be creative – they Increase the to be distributed cake!
Who is his Opposite as Verhandlungsgegner looks, from the concessions expected, is himself also forced concessions to make. This usually leads to a zero-sum game. However, who recognizes that the interdependence between Negotiating as at least a temporary partnership can be considered white, that joint creativity to create value. Resist but the temptation, already in the run-up to the "one correct solution". Be open to new options and solutions. Under the circumstances, "offers" your negotiating partner added value for you, from which you will up to the negotiation still didn't even know existed.
the
8. Prepare well for Persuasion before
Arguments are helpful, but not to the own Position durchzuboxen, because this provokes only extreme counter positions and inevitably leads to zeitaufwändigem and unproductive Haggling. However, we need convincing arguments when it comes to neutral or objective criteria to bring into play. This will help us, deep-seated conflicts of interest, edit, and us from arbitrariness to protect. The sole Insistence on the Rechtsargument, however, leads rarely to the optimal solutions.
the
9. Be realistic: there is no compulsion to consensus
Despite meticulous preparation, good arguments and their ability to work with difficult people to deal constructively, not every transaction automatically to a consensus. Also an "interruption before the demolition" can sometimes be a Failure, not prevent it. There is also no guarantee against irrationality and stupidity. Think about your "best Alternative". The better your Alternatives, the more relaxed you can negotiate. A peaceful dissent may bring more than a rotten compromise.
the
10. Pay attention to your own Fitness
Successful Negotiating requires presence of mind, inner balance and physical Fitness. A negotiation process may take a long time. Maybe you need under time pressure to quickly count, weigh and decide. Respond to and Handle the Relationship requires Fitness and balance. If you are not in a good mood, it is perhaps wiser to try the trial to move, or someone else with their mandate to entrust.
the
Kaspar Consulting your specialist for learn negotiating skills