Ulteriori informazioni
Informationen zum Autor Max H. Bazerman is the J. J. Gerber Distinguished Professor of Dispute Resolution and Organizations and Margaret A. Neale is the H. L. and Helen Kellogg Distinguished Professor of Dispute Resolution and Organizations at the J. L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University. They are coauthors of Cognition and Rationality in Negotiation . Klappentext 'Based on gobs of evidence with real managers, the authors not only identify common errors that many negotiators make, but offer sage prescriptive advice on how you can avoid such errors yourself and perhaps exploit the errors of others.' CHAPTER 1 Introduction to Rational Thinking in Negotiation Everyone negotiates. While many people think of negotiation as something that takes place only between a buyer and a seller or a union and management, in its various forms, negotiation is used every day to resolve differences and allocate resources. It occurs between all sorts of people -- colleagues, spouses, children, neighbors, strangers, corporate entities, even nations negotiate. Some negotiations are face-to-face; others take place over time through sequential decisions between competitors. In business, millions of negotiations happen every day, often within the same company. Think of all the times you negotiate. What could be more central to business than negotiation? And what could be more central to successful negotiation than casting off your illusions about it and, henceforth, negotiating rationally and effectively? This book will teach you how to do just that. Negotiating rationally means making the best decisions to maximize your interests. However, we are not concerned with "getting to yes." Our work shows that in many cases, no agreement at all is better than "getting to yes." What we've learned from thousands of executives will help you decide when it's smart to reach an agreement and when it is not. Negotiating rationally means knowing how to reach the best agreement, not just any agreement. What we've learned will help you avoid decisions that leave both you and those you negotiate with worse off. All executives have pervasive decision-making biases that blind them to opportunities and prevent them from getting as much as they can out of a negotiation. They include the following: 1. Irrationally escalating your commitment to an initial course of action, even when it is no longer the most beneficial choice 2. Assuming your gain must come at the expense of the other party, and missing opportunities for trade-offs that benefit both sides 3. Anchoring your judgments upon irrelevant information, such as an initial offer 4. Being overly affected by the way information is presented to you 5. Relying too much on readily available information, while ignoring more relevant data 6. Failing to consider what you can learn by focusing on the other side's perspective 7. Being overconfident about attaining outcomes that favor you Keep these seven factors in mind as you consider the following example. In 1981 American Airlines introduced its frequent-flier program, arguably the most innovative marketing program in the history of the airline industry. Business fliers (or anyone else who flew frequently) could earn miles for the flights they took and redeem those miles for travel awards. While the incentive plan -- designed to encourage loyalty for American -- may have seemed like a brilliant marketing strategy, it was a miserable decision from a negotiations standpoint and soon proved disastrous from a marketing and financial standpoint. Following American's lead, every airline in the industry soon launched its own frequent-flier program. Increasing the competition further, each company soon offered double miles to their most frequent passengers and even...
