Whenever we try to act upon another individual through an exchange of thoughts we are negociating. Most of us knowingly or unwittingly are involved in one or the other signifier of dialogue. Examples include: pulling up contracts, repairing your wage for occupation, buying from roadside seller etc. Even make up one’s minding on where to hold tiffin besides uses dialogue procedure.
This is the case of a concern trade traveling on where the representatives of two different houses are present. Negotiator 1 is the representative of company A and Negotiator 2 is representative of company B. Company A wants to sell a really cherished piece of Art and has to pay a bank loan of Rs 5 lacs. Company B wants to purchase the art but they have a budget restraint of Rs 5 Lacs above which they can non pay. For company A it & amp ; acirc ; ˆ™s pressing to refund the loan, so they can non disregard the trade and for B besides the art is of absolute necessity and they must hold it.
The two negotiants are asked to negociate every bit much as they can and come to a trade in 10 proceedingss. Given is the maximal deal scope is Rs 1 Lacs to Rs 10 Lacs.
But after 2 proceedingss into the game, all of a sudden the two negotiants get some message from their companies sing the trade. A informs that due to detain in loan payment at that place has been a punishment of 0.5 lacs and asks its representative to sell the art at non less than Rs 5.5 Lacs. B informs that due to high disbursal in other operations of the company their budget has reduced by Rs 0.5 Lacs and they can non pay beyond 4.5 Lacs.
The game was played twice between two different sets of people. In the first unit of ammunition all the information were public, so the participant knew what are the restraint of the other participant and what fortunes have changed. In the 2nd unit of ammunition all information was private, so the participant had no hint about other participant except the fact that he wants to buy/sell a piece of art.
Findingss of the survey and Generalization:
Round 1. ( All information Public )
Deal Price: Rs 4.9 Lacs
In unit of ammunition 1 all the information were given to both the participants. This besides included the information given in between the game, which was announced to both participants. The treatment went in front really good as the first negotiant started with an offer of 7 Lacs to sell. The 2nd negotiant demanded the art at 4 lacs stating the budget restraint and assorted disbursals. Finally after much treatment the trade was struck at 4.9.
Round 2 ( All information Private )
Deal Price: Rs 5.3 Lacs
In this instance the information merely specific to the company one belongs was passed to the participants. The net consequence was that the first participant asked for a monetary value of 9 Lacs while participant 2 was ready to give merely 2 Lacs. It besides must be noted that in this instance people were really stubborn on their standings and it took a batch of clip to make to a concluding trade monetary value. And eventually the trade was struck at Rs 5.3 lacs.
Below are the assorted findings in both the instances
In unit of ammunition one, participants were non really obstinate and they were ready to change their base.
It was easier to come to a trade in unit of ammunition 1. And besides it took lesser clip to repair the trade.
In unit of ammunition 2 the trade value is a batch biased towards one terminal. While in unit of ammunition one the trade monetary value is about the average monetary value of both participants.
The initial offer was excessively high/low in the 2nd unit of ammunition compared to the first.
Round one seems to be a good illustration of integrative dialogue. In unit of ammunition one because participants knew about the restraints of others they were flexible and besides the outlooks were non really high. This is substantiated with the low initial offers made.
Round two seems to be a instance of distributive dialogue. This is substantiated by the really high/low initial offers. Besides it took a batch of clip to come to a trade and each party was seeking to accomplish the maximal addition without believing about the other.
It is clear from the experiment that when each party discloses its restraints and the dialogue starts in a friendly note the result is preferred for both parties. Here by and large the negotiants are unfastened with their restraints and as a consequence the concluding trade is more aligned towards common benefit. Here the trade ends in a positive note and it gives a really good opportunity to construct a relationship. Therefore integrative dialogue is ever a better signifier of dialogue and it can be achieved with proper dialogue accomplishments.
Deduction of Group work:
By and large while working in a group a batch of struggles arise. But there could be fortunes where all members involved in the struggle could hold their ain justifiable ground. In this instance good dialogue accomplishments will guarantee that the single differences are resolved and the squad focuses back on the primary work. Besides in instance of integrative dialogue the squad public presentation rises as there is a sense of lovingness and common apprehension in the squad.
Contribution to OB:
The survey in this study tries to analyse the assorted types of dialogue and their deductions. It tries to turn out that with proper techniques how two parties in the dialogue tabular array can do a better trade for both of them. In the terminal it besides strengthens the belief that Integrative Negotiation being a instance of win-win state of affairs should be the indispensable manner of dialogue. It gives an illustration as to how a dialogue can be moved towards integrative dialogue with proper sharing of information.
Negotiation is a tool of human behavior, a tool anyone can utilize efficaciously. And in our day-to-day life there are 100s of cases where we wittingly or unwittingly negotiate. Proper dialogue accomplishments will give us the needed advantage in existent life. Therefore the definitions of dialogue is non merely coming to a common understanding but coming to a common understanding where both party get benefitted with long term relationship.