These Are the Facts, This Is the Outcome Abstract Since its inception in 1981, BATNA has proved to be a useful tool in solving potential conflicts. A win/win situation which is much sought in organizations is much easily achieved by utilizing options before coming to the negotiation and choosing the option that will best serve the purpose. In our case scenario, Troy could have developed a deep misunderstanding with his staff that is not only counter-productive but may well become personal as well. By exploring alternatives the best solution was reached and an escalation of conflict avoided. It is important that the other side has its own BATNA to bring to the negotiation as well for not only did it have its own options, it also need to have an alternative if an agreement is not reached. With both parties having BATNAs, an agreement can be reached without either side giving too much or receiving too little.
– – – – – – – – – – – Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement or BATNA was first coined by Roger Fisher and William Ury in their book, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Without Giving In (1981) which became a bestseller. According to the authors, the BATNA allows a negotiator better bargaining power as well as more and enhanced alternatives for clarifying and figuring out the best options to resolve a conflict. It gives more flexibility and room for innovation as there is an attractive alternative if and when an agreement is not reached. This is opposed to the traditional bottom line method used by negotiators as protection against giving too much or receiving too little in parleys and discussions. Although it has its purpose, conventional bottom line techniques are rigid and inflexible, they inhibit creativity and discourage ingenious and ground-breaking solutions that are tailor made for a particular given differences. Fisher and Ury introduced and established principled negotiations as a better way of reaching good agreements and better relationships.
... a Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA), “the standard against which any proposed agreement should be measured” (Fisher, and Ury 1981). Negotiations can be ... , there may be potential for a medium ground to be reached offering a certain amount of each. The importance of interests ...
They developed four principles which can be utilized when coping with and settling any type of dispute. These four principles are: 1) separate people from the problem; 2) focus on interests rather than positions; 3) generate a variety of options before settling on an agreement; and 4) insist that the agreement be based on objective criteria (1983, p.11).
When determining a BATNA, one should have a list of actions to take if there is no agreement reached. One should also improve any and all promising options and choose the one that is best. But while you are determining your own BATNA, the other sides BATNA should also be considered. The more is known about the opposite negotiator and his views, the better you will be prepared when you come to the negotiating table. B Spangler (2003) writes, There are also a few things to keep in mind about revealing your BATNA to your adversary.
Although Fisher and Ury do not advise secrecy in their discussion of BATNAs, according to McCarthy (1991, p. 115-122), one should not reveal ones BATNA unless it is better than the other side thinks it is. And since you may not know what the other side thinks you could reveal more than you should if your BATNA turns out to be worse than the opponent thinks it is; then revealing it will weaken your stance. The best option then is to make sure that you come prepared when you finally sit down on that negotiating table. Being prepared not only when your BATNAs and bargaining tools but also with the knowledge and understanding of the other sides view and ideas specially the interests and biases. To disclose or not to disclose then really depends on how strong or attractive your BATNA is.
If you have a strong BATNA it may be good to reveal it as it would show your opponent that you have an alternative course of action. In our case study Troys alternatives may be; 1) Resign from the company and look for a better working environment. 2) Change his attitudes and become a more amiable and considerate supervisor. 3) Consult with his staff how to better get along with them. 4) Stay as he is and dont mind what the staff are saying, after all he is very knowledgeable of office operations, and 5) Completely change his staff and begin with new people. When negotiation fails, Troy may leave the company and look for a more favourable environment. But considering his attitude would meet resentment anywhere, a change of staff could be considered.
... , and long before the employees are even hired, stock options enable companies to recruit better employees. Once the employees are hired, ... could also encourage the employees to look in that best interest of the company and other ... way for companies to share ownership with employees, reward them for performance, and attract and retain a motivated staff. These plans ...
But this can be opposed by the companys top brass especially since they have personnel that have been with company for years. His thorough knowledge and expertise on office operations is a good bargaining chip but then knowledge is a commodity that is easily developed. Hence, if he stays as he is the company might fire him and look for a more viable option. The most promising options would then be to become more considerate of his staff and huddle with them to settle their differences among themselves. These two options can be developed into one best option that is the most feasible and affordable. The BATNA would then be to consult with his staff how he could become more acceptable to them. His staff would then know how to interact with him ore effectively. The other sides alternatives might be; 1) To resign from the company as a unit. 2) Request for a new supervisor.
3) Have an objective talk with Troy. 4) Let the supervisor be since he is more knowledgeable anyway. 5) Endure the ill-treatment as it is very hard to find another job. Exploring the alternatives, to resign as a unit is not favourable to everyone since they have different personal situation. Leaving a job may do more damage. Enduring the unfair treatment is no good either as it is hard working in a not conducive environment.
Letting him be would lead to more abuses. Requesting for a new supervisor is not as easy since it would cost the company money. Their BATNA would then be an objective meeting with Troy where each could bring out its own side and bargain for the best option. Reference Cited Fisher, R. and Ury, W. (1981) Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York: Penguin Books.
... modifying the proposal that was given to the Swisher Company. In this alternative, Swisher will go along with the majority of the ... to Alternative Four.Alternative Five The last alternative involves rejecting the proposal and pursuing a Brand Extension. As one of the strategic options for ...
McCarthy, W. (1991) The Role of Power and Principle in Getting to Yes, in Negotiation Theory and Practice. Retrieved November 17, 2007, from http://www.beyondintractibility.ord/essay/batna/. Spangler, B. (2003, June) Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement (BATNA).
Beyond Intractability [online version]. Retrieved November 17, 2007, from http://www.beyondintractability.org/batna/..