Which Of The Following Between The Parties Requires Them To Negotiate Toward An Agreement
December 21, 2020
Delays: Give the other party a time frame to make a decision. This method uses time to put pressure on the other party. The time frames may be real or artificial. Thus, a team can work more efficiently if each member reveals their preferences before the negotiation. This step allows the team to identify and organize the team`s common priorities, which it can take into account in cooperating with the opposing negotiating party. Since a team is more likely to discuss common information and common interests, teams should actively strive to promote and integrate unique perspectives from experts from different fields. Daniel Thiemann`s studies, focusing primarily on computer-assisted collaboration tasks, have shown that the Awareness preference method is an effective tool to promote knowledge of common priorities and helps the team assess which negotiating issues were of the utmost importance.  Communication acts considered distribution information contain views and facts that support a party`s position. Integration information refers to all information that contributes to networking and identifying mutually beneficial improvements, i.e. the exchange of information on priorities or interests. The claim value refers to all information files aimed at improving a negotiator`s position, such as. B individual offers (which, by definition, cannot be related to the manipulation of the protocol, justification or use of threats). Value added refers to multi-issue offerings, creative solutions and other actions that increase the common benefits of both parties.
At the micro-economic level of individual interactions between the parties, this framework broadens the APIM model to take into account the fact that the behaviour of negotiators consists of content and communication offerings aimed at establishing and improving relations between the parties. These microeconomic interactions organize the characteristics of the negotiation process at the more aggregate level, the meso of the phases and the macrometric level of the whole process, which then leads to specific negotiating results. The framework presented in Figure 5 emphasizes the role of interactions between the parties at the micro level. It is clear that the interdependence between the actions of the two parties at the micronual level will also lead to similar interdependencies at the aggregate level, and the effects of actors and partners could be felt both between phases and within. Therefore, if negotiations are modelled only at the aggregate level, a model similar to APIM, which represents effects of interaction between phases, can provide an adequate structure. However, these interdependencies are the result of interactions at the micro level and the objective of Figure 5 is to emphasize the importance of such a micro-level of aggregate models. ConclusionThe last part of the negotiation in which you and the other party either came to terms or a party decided that the final offer was unacceptable and therefore should be withdrawn.