Posts

Blog 4/1

A situation I envision myself in is serving as the lead negotiator for the national labor union. The stakes are high: not only are wages, benefits, and job security on the line, but so is the long-term relationship between labor and leadership in a rapidly evolving industry. The challenge is not just to reach deals, but to reach one that feels just, sustainable, and forward-looking. I believe I’d handle this situation with a mix of seriousness and strategic care. While I’m naturally collaborative and empathetic, I also recognize the need for preparation, clarity, and firmness in such high-stakes negotiations. Representing so many people requires me to listen deeply, analyze data, anticipate objections, and be clear on my BATNA. I’d need to find the right balance between standing firm on key issues and being creative enough to explore options that generate value for both sides. One major consideration in this role would be accountability. I’d constantly remind myself that I am not speak...
Post a Comment
Read more

Blog 2/25

 1. One key insight from the reading is the distinction between joint problem solving and traditional positional bargaining. In positional bargaining, each party tends to focus narrowly on winning their position, often leading to a competitive, zero-sum mindset. Joint problem solving, on the other hand, encourages negotiators to work together to understand interests and find mutual gains. This reminded me of buying the used car negotiation, both parties initially dug into fixed positions, and the conversation became tense and unproductive. Only after we reframed the issue as a shared problem to solve did we uncover creative solutions that met both of our needs 2. Another powerful insight is that creating value in negotiation requires a willingness to share information and explore underlying interests. While it may feel risky to reveal too much, strategic transparency can help identify tradeoffs that benefit both sides. The reading clarified that effective negotiators know when and ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Blog 4/22

 1.  The persuasive principle that I rely on most when trying to persuade is liking. I tend to focus on building rapport, finding common ground, and expressing genuine interest in the other person. It is a proven fact that people are more inclined to say yes to people that they are connected to. An example of this would be within football if I build closer relationships with my teammates it is easier to persuade them to do the right things or give 100% effort. 2. The principle I am most susceptible to is authority. When someone presents themselves as knowledgeable or experienced, especially with credentials or a confident tone I’m more likely to accept their viewpoint or follow their advice. 3. As a negotiator, I would benefit most from developing the  Reciprocity  principle. This principle is the idea that people feel compelled to return favors or concessions when something is given to them first. While I tend to focus on fairness and collaboration, I don’t always t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Blog 3/18

   The things I believe to ethical in negotiations are honesty, being honest about intentions is important. The next thing I believe is ethical is fairness, while understanding that the goal is to win what you are trying to negotiate its important to be fair and not rip people off. Another thing I believe is ethical is respect, no matter the outcome of the negotiation, respect should always be given.   A thing I believe is unethical in negotiation is deception, while winning the negotiation is important, it should be done at the cost of misleading the other side. Another thing I believe is unethical is coercion, no parties in an negotiation should feel threatend.
Post a Comment
Read more

Shamore Collins blog (2) 2/4

 One of the negotiation tactics I used was Fait Accompli, I told my negotiation partner my asking price in hopes that he would fall for the price. It felt good using it because it set the tone of our negotiation, and I felt it was a good number that he would fall for. I believe it set the tone of the negotiation for 2 reasons, the first was it set the starting point of our negation, and secondly it let him know what my price was and that I was firm on the range. I will try this in certain situations within the future, it could be a good tactic but it is also very risky if me and the person I am negotiating against are not on the same page.  The second negotiation tactic I used was Decide what will be lost. I talked to my partner about what we would both possibly be losing if we didn't reach an evenly deal. This felt very comfortable because it gave us both the opportunity to speak about the problems we were facing and what we would lose out on if we did not reach an agreement....
Post a Comment
Read more

Shamore Collins blog(6) 3/4

 The three rules I plan on using are 'Be prepared for tough questions', 'Don't negotiate just to negotiate', and 'Maintain a sense of perspective'.  Being prepared for tough questions is important. It shows that you are taking the opportunity seriously, and have taken the time to think things through. I would apply this to my negotiation by being ready and prepared for any category of questions that are relative to the job and that may be asked. The second rule I would implement is don't negotiate just to negotiate. I believe this is honestly the most important, when negotiating the focus shouldn't be to prove I'm a better negotiator, it should be to negotiate with an intent. I will apply this in negotiant for my dream job by focusing on negotiation the big topics rather than focusing on every small thing. The last rule I will apply is maintaining a sense of perspective. As stated in the article, the focus is less on the negotiation and more on t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Shamore Collins - February 18th (11th)

 An example where I illustrated the Dual Concern Model was actually very recently. This past weekend me and my family traveled to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, but we drove so this was a 9 hour drive from Shippensburg. My family wanted me to drive back to NJ to leave from there, but I was able to convince them to pick me up from school. I actually had to use three of the strategies in this scenario. I used the accommodating strategy because my family had to drive from NJ to Shippensburg to pick me up on the way there, and vice versa on the way back. To accommodate my family I drove the first 4 hours both ways so that they could get some rest. The second strategy I used was compromising, my sister had a hair appointment on the day we returned so her and my mother wanted to be sure they made it back in time for it, to ensure they would make it back in time I told them we could leave at 3 A.M., even though that meant I would be driving in the middle of the night with close to no sleep...
Post a Comment
Read more