I live outside a big city and don't have a parking space in a place where off-street parking is not allowed. I recently got a job downtown and will need to drive there every day. On the side of my house there is a driveway which is owned by the next house. The first floor tenant of that house parks his car there and drives to work every day. In the back of the driveway is his old car (he just bought a new car a couple months back). I noticed that there is enough space behind my house to park a car, and the same for his house (if some of the grass was converted into a parking space). What I would like to accomplish is to buy a right of way for the driveway from the owner of that house, and then that tenant and I could both park behind our houses and use the common driveway.

I looked in the property records and found the owner's name and another search shows that he owns a commercial printing business that according to an automated website estimate receives $1-2 million/year in sales. I am basically a graduate student without much funds.

I could do another search to maybe find his personal address and then send him a letter. What I am wondering is, since he doesn't seem to have any incentive, or at least I don't know what he wants or needs, how do I craft a letter to increase the chance that he will deal with me? Are there any books I should read on negotiation? I might not mention a sum but would be willing to pay a few thousand dollars for the right of way. I'm not sure how much parking spaces in this area are worth because none of the searches I did brought up anything, they are more focused on downtown, and in any case what I am trying to get is a right of way and not actually buy the spot from someone else. Thanks for any insight.

I have a bit of a history with "anger problems" but in the last 2 years I've fixed them and gotten into the most prestigious school program in my area.  The last year there has been one isolated incident where I got in a fight, however the principle basically(though she couldn't say it aloud') agreed he deserved it and broke policy to let me off the hook.  So I started taking a prescribed medication with a rare side effect of brashness and impulsive violence.  Long story short, I am now being disallowed to go on a school trip to Germany for the summer.  I have absolutely no power, only my German teacher has power and it's very important.  All the negotiating strategies I know of are based on equals coming to a consensus when each party has something the other wants, I have nothing she wants and she has much I want.  What strategies should I incorporate?

I do research on my clients, get a an ballpark idea of what their income might be and I asset my counter offer from that, from my experience in the industry and what I have gotten paid in the past. However this never makes back and forth discussion of negotiation any easier.

When I don’t hear back from a client for a few days, I feel as if they have movies on to somewhere else.

So I think if I wanted to hear back quicker from the client quicker, I think I have to change something up with the way I negotiate.
Any suggestions?

Anyone?

Still in the early stages and could use some advice. I am able to get people to come to the site and look around -- but getting people to register and leave comments is a bit of a challenge.

Any advice or comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks very much.

Have you had to negotiate your salary or service fees in this, or past, recessions? What is different about negotiating pay in a recession compared to a strong economy?

Among other negotiation books, this one is logically constructed and is written in fine detail be its author, which made it very interesting to me.

The book mainly talks about the negative facts a negotiator must be aware of and overcome in this business.

This has many examples as well which made it easy to understand. And the good thing about it that I find is that it is not just simply based on theory.

Here is how I did it:
Negotiation Research: What special offers are the competitors offering?  Dish Network is offering a similar deal for new customers.  Sure I don't want to switch and think their service is weaker than Comcast, but Comcast doesn't know that.

BATNA: What is my Best Alternative to No Agreement?  Well I already have Comcast service and I am happy with it, I am just paying a bit too much for it.  So really my alternative to having Comcast sign me up for their program is to maintain the Status Quo.  It is not like they are going to cancel my service for trying to negotiate with them.  I really have nothing to lose.  They don't have to know that I really don't plan on switching to Dish Network.

Making the Call: 1-800-COM-CAST (I hate mnemonic phone numbers!) and ask for customer service.  Once I get a representative I tell them how much I like the new offer and that I am interested in signing up for it.  I already know I don't qualify but I want them to starting trying to help me out.  The Customer Service Representative(CSR) tells me that the offer is only for new customers or existing customers that don't already have all three services.  I politely ask if there is anything they can do.  Of course the answer is "no", but hey the first line usually doesn't have the authority. 

Escalation: I then ask who would have the authority to make a change, especially if I am thinking of changing my service provider?  The CSR immediately transfers me to a resolution manager.  BINGO! Someone who can actually help.  Ok so these resolution managers(or whatever they are called) actually get paid to keep you as a customer but also get a commission for not giving in to your demands.  If they give in the make a less commission, if they lose you as a customer they make less than if they give in.  So their ultimate goals is to keep you at the status quo but give in before losing you as a customer.  I start all over with this Resolution Manager.  I tell them I really like the offer and ask if I qualify.  Again the answer is "No, it is only for new customers."  I then stay really polite but mention the offer from Dish Network.  I then ask them "Why shouldn't I make the switch to the other company?"  Ball game changes! 

First Offer: They offer me the plan without some of the bells and whistles.  The Resolution Manager is at this point trying to hang on to some of her extra commission for not giving totally in to my requests.  My goal here is to stay nice and keep her happy with me but be frank about my willingness to leave(not really.)  I tell her that I have some friends that really love Dish Network and that their offer is really enticing.  I also tell her that I am a long time customer and have always been really happy with the service that Comcast has given me.  Hook Set!

Next Offer: She offers me the plan as advertised.  BINGO!  I have achieved my goal.  I thank the rep for her help(Always have your opponent leave happy) and tell her how happy I am to be able to keep Comcast. 

Have you ever had to negotiate with your Cable company?  What was your experience?

Fundamental Elements of the Negotiation Process

"... negotiations commonly follow a four-step path: preparation, information exchange, explicit bargaining, and commitment. ... Negotiation is, in short, a kind of universal dance with four stages or steps. And it works best when both parties are experienced dancers."

One of the interesting aspects to negotiation theory is that even the fundamental elements of the process are subject to varying opinions. The quotation above breaks the process down into four phases. I prefer three. Let's review the basics before moving on.

Phase I: Pre-bargaining Phase

1. Information: Learn as much as you can about the problem. What information do you need from the other side?

2. Leverage Evaluation: Evaluate your leverage and the other party's leverage at the outset. This is important because there may be a number of things you can do to improve your leverage or diminish the leverage of the other side. What will you do to enhance your leverage?

3. Analysis: What are the issues?

4. Rapport: Establish rapport with your opponent(s). You need to determine early on if your opponents are going to be cooperative; if not, consider employing a mediator as soon as practical.

5. Goals and expectations: Goals are one thing; expectations are something else.

6. Type of negotiation: What type of negotiation do you expect? Will this be highly competitive, cooperative, or something unusual? Will you be negotiating face to face, by fax, through a mediator, or in some other manner?

7. Budget: Every negotiation has its costs. Lawyers will avoid conflicts with their clients by discussing budgets sooner rather than later. Many times there are a number of choices for enhancing leverage. For example, you may enhance your leverage by taking several depositions, by adding parties to a law suit, by serving subpoenas on witnesses, or by hiring experts. Unless your client has unlimited resources, you will have to make some hard choices, which should be designed to give you the "most bang for your buck".

8. Plan: What's your negotiation plan?

Phase II: Bargaining Phase

1. Logistics : When, where, and how will you negotiate? This can be especially important in multi-party cases.

2. Opening offers: What is the best offer you can justify? Should you make it, or wait to let another party go first?

3. Subsequent offers: How should you adjust your negotiating plan when responding to unanticipated moves by your opponent?

4. Tactics : What sort of tactics will you employ? What sort of tactics is your opponent using on you?

5. Concessions: What concessions will you make? How will you make them?

6. Resolution: What is the best way to resolve the problem? Is there an elegant solution? Be on constant lookout for compromise and creative solutions.

Phase III: Closure Phase

1. Logistics : How and when will you close? At mediation or later on? Who will prepare the final agreement?

2. Documentation: Prepare a closing checklist.

3. Emotional closure: It's one thing to end a legal dispute; it's another to address the underlying interests and needs of the parties. If you neglect the latter, the agreement will probably not sustain.

4. Implementation: It's not over until it is over.

Positive affect in negotiation

Even before the negotiation process starts, people in a positive mood have more confidence, and higher tendencies to plan to use a cooperative strategy. During the negotiation, negotiators who are in a positive mood tend to enjoy the interaction more, show less contentious behavior, use less aggressive tactics and more cooperative strategies. This in turn increases the likelihood that parties will reach their instrumental goals, and enhance the ability to find integrative gains. Indeed, compared with negotiators with negative or natural affectivity, negotiators with positive affectivity reached more agreements and tended to honor those agreements more. Those favorable outcomes are due to better decision making processes, such as flexible thinking, creative problem solving, respect for others' perspectives, willingness to take risks and higher confidence. Post negotiation positive affect has beneficial consequences as well. It increases satisfaction with achieved outcome and influences one's desire for future interactions. The PA aroused by reaching an agreement facilitates the dyadic relationship, which result in affective commitment that sets the stage for subsequent interactions.

PA also has its drawbacks: it distorts perception of self performance, such that performance is judged to be relatively better than it actually is. Thus, studies involving self reports on achieved outcomes might be biased.

Negative affect in negotiation

Negative affect has detrimental effects on various stages in the negotiation process. Although various negative emotions affect negotiation outcomes, by far the most researched is anger. Angry negotiators plan to use more competitive strategies and to cooperate less, even before the negotiation starts. These competitive strategies are related to reduced joint outcomes. During negotiations, anger disrupts the process by reducing the level of trust, clouding parties' judgment, narrowing parties' focus of attention and changing their central goal from reaching agreement to retaliating against the other side. Angry negotiators pay less attention to opponent's interests and are less accurate in judging their interests, thus achieve lower joint gains. Moreover, because anger makes negotiators more self-centered in their preferences, it increases the likelihood that they will reject profitable offers. Anger doesn't help in achieving negotiation goals either: it reduces joint gains and does not help to boost personal gains, as angry negotiators don't succeed in claiming more for themselves. Moreover, negative emotions lead to acceptance of settlements that are not in the positive utility function but rather have a negative utility. However, expression of negative emotions during negotiation can sometimes be beneficial: legitimately expressed anger can be an effective way to show one's commitment, sincerity, and needs. Moreover, although NA reduces gains in integrative tasks, it is a better strategy than PA in distributive tasks (such as zero-sum).

Conclusion

Finally, to conclude in the words of Wrigley and Moshe Dayan, a) When two men in business always agree, one of them is unnecessary. b) If you want to make peace, you don't talk to your friends, you talk to your enemies.

Individuals who would benefit from advanced value-focused negotiation skills and those needing to move beyond negotiation basics to the understanding and application of advanced techniques. This seminar supports negotiators who want the winning advantage within the realm of supply.
You Will Learn

    * How to achieve "quantum-leap," value-adding results
    * How to identify and prioritize the key issues
    * How to develop strategic negotiation objectives
    * How to develop and implement a negotiation strategy
    * Advanced negotiation tools and techniques

Course Outline

   1. Understanding the process of negotiation: Understanding the negotiation process; when negotiation is appropriate; and the key influences on whether to competitively bid or negotiate
   2. Current state analysis: Defining the interests of the parties; understanding the importance of relative buyer/supplier position strength; and how to determine a useful negotiation range
   3. Market and Industry analysis: Information sources; comparing supplier financials to identify areas for negotiation; evaluating potential suppliers; and reducing the supplier portfolio to the vital few
   4. Preparation strategies: Developing buyer needs and expectations with a focus on organizational competitive imperatives; when to use a negotiations team; and a useful pre-negotiation checklist
   5. Implementing negotiation strategy: Understanding supplier expectations; incorporating motivational theory; negotiation tactics and techniques; common rules; a follow-up checklist; and defining a "walk-away" point
   6. Situation-specific negotiation strategies: Legal issues; negotiating for economies-of-scale; price and cost analysis; understanding supplier costs; cost modeling; using cost behavior in negotiations; identifying hidden supplier profits; negotiating for supplier contribution to buyer organization strategic objectives
   7. A model for mutually beneficial negotiation

What You Can Expect
In this intensive, week-long executive education program, you will probe the multiple dimensions of high-stakes negotiations, learning how to put the pieces together and complete the best deals for your organization.

Your Course of Study
You will receive solid grounding in the diverse elements of a deal and the process for achieving goals, fostering understanding, creating the right process, and promoting resolution. Learning through hands-on simulations as well as lectures, case studies, and group discussions, you will emerge with new conceptual frameworks and practical skills.

Who Is Right for the Program
Offering a career-defining experience for senior executives facing especially challenging negotiations, this leadership training program is valuable to those realigning corporate strategy, undertaking sizeable deals, settling a major dispute, or juggling multiple constituencies.